A Watershed‐Based Approach to Environmental Education Integrating Ecology, Hydrology, and Geochemistry

Abstract

Watersheds provide an excellent focus for environmental education because they are the basic unit where hydrological and biogeochemical cycles can best be studied (Likens and Borman 1995). Examples of environmental education at the watershed level at other institutions include work within the Burd Run (Woltemade and Blewett 2002), Bushkill (Brandes and Germanoski 2001), and French Creek Watersheds (O’Brien et al. 2002) where case studies, field exercises, and laboratory analyses have been utilized. Several recent studies have also provided examples of interdisciplinary classes and field exercises for adaptation by campuses containing waterways and wetlands (Heins and Walker 1998, Panno et al. 1998, Woltemade and Blewett 2002). All of these projects have guided the development of the goals and objectives for our efforts. The Binghamton University (BU) campus is located within a small watershed that contains forest covered areas with ponds and wetlands embedded within an urban landscape, suburban housing tracts along a straightened river corridor, and a university campus with high human density and a large percentage of paved surfaces. These differences in land uses influence water flow, ecosystem dynamics, and water quality, all ideal topics for study from a multidisciplinary perspective. While we had begun hydrological monitoring within this watershed to fulfill needs within our Environmental Geology curriculum previously (Salvage et al. 2003), there were opportunities for study in the Fuller Hollow Creek Watershed (FHCW) from a broader perspective. This paper outlines the development of a broad watershed-based education approach at BU recently funded by the National Science Foundation Course Curriculum and Laboratory Improvement (NSF CCLI) Program. One objective for the project was to integrate ecology with hydrology and geochemistry in order to initiate study of the FHCW from a process-oriented multidisciplinary approach. Our second objective involved use of pollution as a unifying theme for understanding biogeochemical cycles within a mixed land use watershed on a university campus. Our third objective involved promoting synergy of research and education opportunities for all students irrespective of background or discipline. Keys to meeting the project objectives were 1) integration of physical, chemical and biological perspectives from an ecologist (Zhu), hydrologist (Salvage) and geochemist (Graney), 2) installation and use of equipment to monitor biogeochemical processes at three sites with differing land use within the watershed, 3) development of crossdisciplinary exercises to link concepts within three courses in three different disciplines: Hydrology (Environmental Studies, ENVI 342), Environmental Measurements (Geology, GEOL 465), and Ecosystem Ecology (Biology, BIOL 455), 4) developing a plan for evaluation and revision of the field exercises, 5) involving students, including future K-12 science teachers, in all stages of the project, 6) encouraging undergraduate participation in research, and 7) ensuring long-term data collection and archiving for future use and dissemination. We believe that cross-linking between hydrology, 22