1. Youth Water Education
Needs Assessment
Amy Timmerman – University of Nebraska Extension Educator

2. TEAM*Dan Downing – University of Missouri
*Justin Hougham – University of Wisconsin
*Monica Day – Michigan State
*Kristi Lekies – The Ohio State University
*Zuzana Bohrerova – The Ohio State University
*Christine Wood – South Dakota State University
*Andrea Lorek Strauss – University of Minnesota
Brandon Schroeder – Michigan State
Katherin Jaeger – South Dakota State
Katrina Sally Widhom – University of Illinois
Bradley Cogdill – North Dakota State
Rebecca Power – NC Water Network
Amber Mase – NC Water Network
Anne Nardi – NC Water Network

3. Why the needs assessment?

4. Goals
• Determine curriculum being used
for youth water education
• Identify curriculum that make
youth knowledgeable, passionate
and active in water related issues
• Identify placed-based education
• Find gaps in program/curriculum
either by age, stewardship or
engagement

5. Where to start
• Assessment of Universities
• Goal 15 respondents from all 12 states
• Assessment of Outside Partners
• Goal 3 respondents from all 12 states

6. Questions
• Ages of youth taught
• Areas you provide water education
• Curriculum used
• Average number of contact hours
• Program evaluation – teacher, youth, visual
and ripple
• Importance of education standards
• Citizen scientist component

7. Questions Continued
• Explain ripple effects observed
• Examples of youth being positively
impacted
• What makes youth excited
• Observation of increased youth
involvement in community
• What are you missing
• How to make your program better
• Barriers

8. University Assessment
230 completed – 9 States
3.91%
1.30%
7.39%
19.57%
5.65%
9.57%16.96%
13.48%
22.17%
Percent of Participation by University
Illinois Michigan State Missouri Nebraska NDSU Ohio State Purdue Extension SDSU Wisconsin
9
3
17
45
13
22
39
31
51
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Illinois Michigan
State
Missouri Nebraska NDSU Ohio State Purdue
Extension
SDSU Wisconsin
Number Participated by University

9. University Assessment
9
30
95
61
45
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Early Childhood (0-
PreK)
Early Elementary (K-2) Upper Elementary (3-
5)
Middle School (6-8) High School (9-12)
Number of Respondents By Age

10. University Assessment
53
62
Single Age Taught Multiple Age Taught

11. University Assessment
15
7
3
10
2
10
4
1
8
2
Number of Combination of Ages Taught
Upper Elementary, Middle School, High School
Middle School, High School
Early Childhood, Early Elementary, Upper Elementary ,
Middle School, High School
Early Elementary, Upper Elementary, Middle School, High
School
Upper Elementary, High School
Upper Elementary, Middle School
Early Elementary, Upper Elementary, Middle School
Early Childhood, Early Elementary, Upper Elementary,
Middle School
Early Elementary, Upper Elementary
Early Childhood, Early Elementary, Upper Elementary

12. University Assessment
Importance of Education Standards
Linear Scale (1 not important – 10 very important)
•6.9
State Standards
• 50 Yes, 23 No
Next Generation
• 20 Yes, 39 No
Common Core
• 19 Yes, 35 No

13. University Assessment
• Attitude = not my
expertise, priority, paid
• School = no space for
hands-on, no money for
buses, too many kids
• Time = in general
• Money = no specification
in how
• Personnel = need
additional help –
volunteers, community
involvement, dedicated
staff
• Supplies/programs =
more hands-on programs,
updated printed material

14. University Assessment
What pieces are missing?
• Standard based water curriculum
• Knowledge and resources of the educator
• Updated tools and information
• Many comparing it to the very structured
national 4H program

15. University Assessment
What makes youth excited?
• Excitement of youth = educator being
excited
• Hands-on/interactive activity
• Animals
• Program
• Impact – community involvement, transfer
of knowledge, collaboration

16. University Assessment
Early Childhood Curriculum
• Water rocks
• Project wild – aquatic
• Water conservation curriculum – There’s no
new water!
• Sea grant network

17. University Assessment
Early Elementary Curriculum
• Project wild – aquatic
• Water conservation curriculum – There’s no
new water!
• Sea grant network
• Project wet
• Rivers are alive
• Water riches
• Edible aquifers
• Water conservation/pollution

18. University Assessment
Upper Elementary
Curriculum
• Project wild – aquatic
• Water conservation curriculum – There’s no new water!
• Sea grant network
• Project wet
• Rivers are alive
• Water riches
• Water rocks
• Soil & Water Science (State 4-H)
• Illinois river watch
• Enviroscape
• Dane county water watchers
program
• GLOBE
• Steam ecology and water
monitoring workshop
• Junior master gardener
• Storm water sleuth
• Wonderwise – women in science
• Rain water town model
• Idaho DEQ
• W.A.T.E.R
• Missouri Dept. of Conservation
• Several personally created

19. University Assessment
Middle School Curriculum
• Sea grant network
• Project wet
• Water rocks
• Soil & Water Science (State 4-H)
• Citizen Scientist (Illinois)
• DOTS Equipment

20. University Assessment
High School Curriculum
• Sea grant network
• Project wet
• Water rocks
• Soil & Water Science (State 4-H)
• Water conservation curriculum – There’s No New Water
• Enviroscape
• DOTS Equipment
• Several personally created
• Ohio Lake management society’s citizen lake awareness
• Stream quality monitoring – Ohio Dept. of Natural
Resources
• Wisconsin groundwater study guide
• Sand-tank groundwater model
• Ohio fertilizer applicator certification and training

21. Outside Partners Assessment
46 completed – 7 States
2
4
2
3
30
3
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Number Participated
• Soil & Water Conservation
District
• Natural Resource District
• Dept. of Environmental Quality
• Local Watershed Coalition
• Cranbrook Institute of Science
• Edgerton Explorit Center
• Private Nature Center
• Museum
• Sea Grant
• County Parks
• Project Learning Tree
• Envirothon

22. Outside Partners Assessment
14
26
39
32
22
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Early Childhood (0-PreK) Early Elementary (K-2) Upper Elementary (3-5) Middle School (6-8) High School (9-12)
Number of Respondent by Ages

23. Outside Partners Assessment
18.2
81.8
Single Age Taught Multiple Age Taught

24. Outside Partners Assessment
2
3
12
5
2
2
3
2
2
Number of Combination by Age
Upper Elementary, Middle School, High
School
Middle School, High School
Early Childhood, Early Elementary, Upper
Elementary , Middle School, High School
Early Elementary, Upper Elementary, Middle
School, High School
Upper Elementary, High School
Upper Elementary, Middle School
Early Elementary, Upper Elementary, Middle
School

25. Outside Partners Assessment
Importance of Education Standards
Linear Scale (1 not important – 10 very important)
•7.4
State Standards
• 28 Yes, 5 No
Next Generation
• 13 Yes, 15 No
Common Core
• 14 Yes, 15 No

26. Outside Partners Assessment
Youth becoming involved with the community
• 19 Yes, 15 No
• Clean up of trails & waterways
• Stream monitoring
• Volunteer numbers increase
• Plant rain gardens
• Installed rain barrels
• Girl Scout gold award project
• Participation in citizen science projects
• College interns & job applicants
• Habitat improvement
• Operation O’Town Creek Clean

27. Outside Partners Assessment
What pieces are missing?
• Standard based water curriculum – how does
it fit
• Cross-curricular connections
• Hands-on projects & citizen scientist projects
• Follow-up (evaluation)

28. University Assessment
What are barriers?
• School
• Time
• Money
• Lack of interest from adults

29. University Assessment
Citizen Scientist Opportunities
• Stream watch/monitoring
• Storm drain marking
• Frog watch
• Pond watch

30. What’s Next?
• Finalize data analysis
• Compare university & partner results
• Provide the list of resources currently
available on the North Central Water
Network website

31. What’s Next?
• How to build communication capabilities
with outside partners?
• Dig into research and determine the best
way to “train the trainer” – when does
virtual training vs hands-on training work

32. Amy Timmerman
atimmerman2@unl.edu
402-336-2760
Twitter:@AmyTimmerman2