curriculum for the bioregion - intranet home

Curriculumfor the Bioregion:

Connecting What We Learnto Where We Live

We are for the academic success of all students.Increasing access to significant learning experiences forstudents, especially those under-represented in highereducation is our primary goal. The measure of our successover time will be improvements not only in retention rates,but also academic achievement and graduation rates.

We work at the state, regional, and national levels withfaculty members, staff, and administrators to share goodpractices and carry out collaborative projects aimed atimproving undergraduate teaching and student learning.Through workshops, institutes, campus visits,publications, and a website, the Washington Centerpromotes projects aimed at enhancing the learning of allstudents. Through our website and publications, andthrough campus visits and consultations, we connectpeople, projects, and resources.

Our workWe focus our work in four major areas: curricularinitiatives, including developmental education,quantitative literacy, and curriculum for the bioregion;equity and diversity, including the organizing of an annualretreat for campus teams; faculty enrichment, including thescholarship of teaching and learning; and learningcommunities, including national summer institutes and aweb-based national learning community directory andresources.

Our assumptionsThree major assumptions inform our practice:(1) collaboration is key both within and across institutions,(2) effective educational practices need to be recognizedand built upon, and (3) systemic long-term change resultsfrom small-scale, locally determined changes in practicethat are carefully documented and nurtured.

Mandate and fundingThe Washington State Legislature established theWashington Center in 1985 as a public service centerof The Evergreen State College, with a mandate towork with two- and four-year higher educationinstitutions and other educators throughout the state toimprove the quality of undergraduate education. TheExxon and Ford Foundations provided start-upfunding; since 1987, the Legislature has funded theCenter’s work.

Consortium members and staffWashington Center is organized as a statewideconsortium with a national reach. Our fifty-onemember institutions include thirty-three communityand technical colleges, six public four-year institutions,one tribal college, and eleven independent colleges inWashington State. Our core staff comprises two co-directors and two support staff.

CollaborationIn addition to organizing initiatives, the Centercollaborates in other state, regional, national, andinternational educational reform initiatives. Weregularly seek grants for special projects. The NationalCouncil on Education in the Disciplines, the Williamand Flora Hewlett Foundation, The Pew CharitableTrusts, the Ford Foundation, the National ScienceFoundation, the Mathematical Association of America,the Washington State Board for Community andTechnical Colleges, the Fund for Improvement of Post-Secondary Education, and The Russell FamilyFoundation have supported Washington Center’s work.

Published by theWashington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education

The Evergreen State College2700 Evergreen Parkway NW, Olympia, WA 98505

360-867-6611 www.evergreen.edu/washcenter

Co-DirectorsEmily Lardner and Gillies Malnarich

Senior Scholar and Director, Curriculum for the Bioregion InitiativeJean MacGregor

Curriculum for the Bioregion Student StaffJodi Patrykus and Jennifer Swidler

Editing and LayoutEsmé Ryan and Mary Geraci

The inquiry and planning phase of the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiativewas made possible by a grant from The Russell Family Foundation (www.trff.org).

To learn more about the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiative,visit www.evergreen.edu/washcenter.

For citation purposes, please use:Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education. 2006.

Curriculum for the Bioregion: Connecting What We Learn to Where We Live. A Report onthe Inquiry and Planning Phase of a New Initiative of the Washington Center.

Jean MacGregor, ed. Olympia, WA:The Evergreen State College.

This document is printed on recycled, acid-free paper using agri-based inks.

About the cover:Tom Carlson, Assistant Professor in Geography and Geographic Information Systems in the Urban Studies Department at the

University of Washington Tacoma, created this map for the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiative. The map’s bioregionalboundaries were derived from the watershed units that drain into Puget Sound. The land cover types were derived from a

2001 Landsat 7 satellite image.

ConnectingWhat We Learn to

Where We LiveOur Puget Sound bioregion is majestically scenic.

It is ecologically diverse and culturally rich.

It is famously innovative.

And it is globally connected.

But dramatic growth is changing the bioregion. Congested highways, disap-

pearing farmland and open space, deteriorating health of the environment,

changing climate, and widening gaps between rich and poor all represent

disquieting trends. In response to these challenges, farsighted people and

organizations are stepping up and creating new approaches for sustaining our

communities, economies, and ecosystems.

Our regional colleges and universities should be among these visionaries,

playing a prominent role in preparing students for their future roles as stew-

ards of the places where they live. But for the most part, they are not. Few of

the 190,000 undergraduates in the Puget Sound region have tangible opportu-

nities to connect what they learn with where they live, or to explore what it

means to live here responsibly.

In the coming decades, the decisions that today’s undergraduates make—in

their homes, neighborhoods, and workplaces—will profoundly shape the

communities and landscapes of this bioregion. Their college years offer a

singular opportunity to explore the complexity, critical thought, and ethical

questions that engagement with civic issues and sustainability requires. In

Washington’s higher education system, we have significant bioregional exper-

tise, scores of interested, creative teachers, avid students, and an outstanding

history of curriculum innovation and inter-institutional collaboration. Mar-

shalling these resources to create a “curriculum for the bioregion” is within

our reach.

2 Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:INQUIRY AND PLANNING PHASE FOR

CURRICULUM FOR THE BIOREGION

The Idea

Bioregions are, literally, “life places”—placescharacterized by the interrelated natural andsocial systems upon which we rely for our well-being. The focus of this project, the Puget Soundbioregion, includes the Sound itself and thewatersheds that drain into it. This bioregion ishome to 4.2 million people as well as a richdiversity of marine and terrestrial life. Situatinglearning in our bioregion would mean connectingstudents with the immediacy and significance ofwhat is happening here, linking classroom theoryto local places, people, and practices. Creatingcurriculum for the bioregion implies that weprepare our students for a locally rooted citizen-ship that will ensure healthy communities,economies, and ecosystems.

We see “curriculum for the bioregion” not as asingle, “add-on” course; this curricular need is toourgent and too relevant. Rather, we envision acollection of teaching approaches that could beused in existing courses and that engage studentswith the issues facing the bioregion. We alsoenvision a community of faculty and staff engag-ing students in bioregional learning and withthose people and organizations working onsolutions. If this place-based learning is success-fully implemented, more college graduates will beknowledgeable participants in the complexdiscussions of environmental quality andsustainability. They will have the tools to assumepersonal and community responsibility for envi-ronmental stewardship wherever they live.

Our challenge is to give students a toolbox for developing a sense of placeand an ingrained motivation for using those tools that they will carry with them

wherever they go in the future.

–Amy Snover, Research Scientist, Climate Impacts Group, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans,University of Washington Seattle

Curriculum for the Bioregion Report 3

Findings

Through our campus interviews, surveys, andthe think tank meeting, we learned that opportuni-ties for bioregional learning are under-developed,especially in introductory and general educationclasses; that students, faculty, staff, and adminis-trators recognize the need and opportunity herefor new curricula; and that a number of existinginitiatives should be productively built upon. Ourspecific findings follow.

1. Undergraduates are becoming increasinglyconcerned about the environmental quality ofthis region. They recognize the need not only tobecome more informed but also better equippedto understand complex issues and to do theirpart in creating a positive, sustainable future.Students were remarkably consistent in askingto explore issues in ways that “translate class-room knowledge to the real world” and to learnways to participate actively in solutions.

2. A small but growing number of faculty mem-bers across disciplines believe that abioregional approach to the curriculum isnecessary and important and they are eager tocontribute to it. They noted that the immediacyand relevance of bioregional issues could createsignificant learning experiences for students.Faculty members also emphasized that theyneed to learn more about the bioregion and itsissues, and gain a grounding in the emergingfield of “education for sustainability.”

Inquiry and Planning Process

To gauge interest in this idea, find out whatbioregional learning opportunities exist now, anddiscern what kinds of new learning opportunitiesare called for, we in the Washington Center forImproving the Quality of Undergraduate Educa-tion, with support from The Russell FamilyFoundation, launched an eighteen-month inquiryand planning phase for the “Curriculum for theBioregion” initiative in January, 2005. Eighteencampuses in the Puget Sound bioregion partici-pated: nine baccalaureate colleges and universitiesand nine community colleges. A twenty-eightmember steering committee (drawn from thecampuses and several partner organizations)helped shape this inquiry. In the spring and fall of2005, we visited each campus and interviewedstudents, faculty members, staff, and senioradministrators. Through an institutional survey,we asked what curricula involving bioregionallearning are now in place and how these programsare supported. Through online surveys, we invitedstudents, faculty, and staff to give us additionalideas. In February, 2006, we convened a one-daythink tank, a gathering at which more than ahundred individuals reflected on our initialfindings and gave us further recommendations.

“Textbooks and lectures provide us with information but it doesn’t stay with us,unless we build personal connections to what we are learning.”

Student comment, five-minute paper.


3. While study-in-the-major in environmentalfields is well developed at most baccalaureateinstitutions, opportunities for all students toacquire bioregional knowledge, examineregional issues, or explore sustainability intheir general education classes are under-developed and fragmented throughout. Therich interdisciplinary context of this area ofstudy is under-utilized in most general educa-tion curricula. Faculty report few opportuni-ties to collaborate across disciplines or withcolleagues from other colleges and universi-ties. Such collaboration is critical and it isvirtually nonexistent in the state of Washing-ton.

4. There is impressive research expertise andscholarship about the bioregion, yet mecha-nisms for sharing this knowledge for teachingor curriculum development purposes are rare.

5. On almost every campus, there are pockets ofexciting, engaging curricular work—ininterdisciplinary courses, learning communityprograms, integrative field courses, servicelearning projects, and civic engagementinitiatives. These could be greatly expandedand adapted to other institutions in the region,or deepened through inter-institutionalpartnerships.

Recommendations

Our campus visits and the think tank revealedan enthusiasm and readiness for moving forwardcollectively to create new learning opportunitiesfor faculty members and students. Four recom-mendations emerged.

1. Expand and strengthen opportunities forundergraduate students to learn about thisbioregion and its issues, especially in introduc-tory and general education courses, including• the development of interdisciplinary cur-

riculum with bioregional themes• the creation of bioregional and

sustainability learning activities for infusioninto courses that reach large numbers oflower-division students

• the expansion of opportunities for studentsto engage in field learning, especiallyrelated to needed field research.

2. Create bioregional learning opportunities forfaculty members.

3. Develop campuses as bioregional learninglaboratories.

4. Create a clearinghouse for sharing of resourcesand teaching approaches.

I love seeing the students become so excited about things they weren’t aware ofright in their own neighborhood/city/state. I get lots of comments from both extremes:

students who have lived here their whole lives and “never knew”as well as students brand new to the area.

–Ann Murkowski, Instructor in Math & Science,North Seattle Community College


Inquiry and Planning PhaseCurriculum for the Bioregion Initiative

Participating Campuses

Antioch University SeattleBellevue Community CollegeCascadia Community CollegeEdmonds Community CollegeNorth Seattle Community CollegeOlympic CollegePacific Lutheran UniversityPeninsula CollegePierce CollegeSeattle Central Community CollegeSeattle UniversitySkagit Valley CollegeThe Evergreen State CollegeUniversity of Puget SoundUniversity of Washington BothellUniversity of Washington SeattleUniversity of Washington TacomaWestern Washington University

Organizational Partners

Association for the Advancement ofSustainability in Higher Education

Environmental Education Associationof Washington

Washington Campus CompactWhidbey Institute

Next Steps

With continued funding from The RussellFamily Foundation for the 2006-07 academicyear, we in the Washington Center will begin to

• make existing bioregional curriculum re-sources accessible via the Washington Centerwebsite

• disseminate the promising approaches that arealready in place through workshops andcurriculum planning retreats on the integrationof bioregional issues and sustainability intogeneral education courses

• act on the recommendations by conveningseveral inter-institutional working groups todevelop several multi-year faculty and curricu-lum development projects

• make these opportunities available to all of theWashington Center member institutions in thePuget Sound bioregion

• further shape this initiative and identify newopportunities and partners with the initiative’ssteering committee.

Developing curriculum for the bioregion willrequire commitment and reaching across bound-aries. It is best done collaboratively, in studentand faculty learning communities that crossdisciplines and institutions. We aim to build onthe pockets of good work already under way oncampuses in the region, draw on a growing circleof interested faculty members, and begin a pro-cess of more ambitious curricular transformation.

My dream project would be to have a group of people work togetherto create a curriculum “library” that faculty could use for ideas about teaching

about bioregional sustainability.

–Sharon Anthony, Faculty Member in Environmental Studies,The Evergreen State College


INQUIRY AND PLANNING PHASE

FOR CURRICULUM FOR THE BIOREGION

(2005–06)

briefings to the institution’s senior staff; inter-views with faculty, staff, and students; classpresentations; and faculty workshops. We askedfaculty how students currently engage in learningabout this region and its issues and where andhow they learn about the theory and practice ofsustainability. We also asked them what theirdream courses or programs might be. Institutionalsurveys requested that campuses report on howenvironmental and sustainability studies, espe-cially those focusing on the bioregion, currentlyappear in the undergraduate curriculum and whatsupport there is for field- or community-basedresearch, service and civic learning, and facultyand curriculum development.

On February 2, 2006, a “Curriculum for theBioregion Think Tank” brought together morethan a hundred faculty members, academicadministrators, and representatives of seventeenregional initiatives involved in environmentalstewardship or sustainability. We presented ourfindings and asked this group’s advice about nextsteps. The following sections summarize what welearned and the recommendations that emerged.

Curriculum for the Bioregion is a new facultyand curriculum development initiative of theWashington Center for Improving the Quality ofUndergraduate Education. A grant from TheRussell Family Foundation has supported aninquiry and planning phase (January 2005–June2006) that involved assessment, asset mapping,planning, and network building among eighteencampuses in the Puget Sound region: nine com-munity colleges and nine four-year institutions.Other partners are the Association for the Ad-vancement of Sustainability in Higher Education,the Environmental Education Association ofWashington, Washington Campus Compact, andthe Whidbey Institute.

The planning process began with the creationof a twenty-eight member steering committeedrawn from our participating campuses andpartner organizations. With their advice, wedesigned surveys to capture institutional informa-tion as well as the perspectives and advice ofstudents, faculty, and staff. Steering committeemembers facilitated visits, generally two days inlength, to each campus. These visits comprised

Taking the survey made me aware of the fact that I had no education prior to collegethat connected me to a place. The number one element important to making people care

about other people in their communities and the environment is to make them realizethat they are not an island or their own entity.

–Student comment, five-minute paper


What Students Told Us

We gleaned student perspectives from twosources: an online survey completed by 490students, and meetings with approximately 500students in campus leadership groups and in anarray of undergraduate classes. At the end of ourmeetings, we often asked them to contributeideas and suggestions on “five-minute paper”index cards. The online survey was not set up asa random sample; rather, the intent was togather a range of student perspectives fromdifferent classes and campuses. Most of thestudent respondents were enrolled in variouslower-division, general education classes. Thesurvey and its results can be found at theCurriculum for the Bioregion website.

1. Students told us they are concerned aboutenvironmental quality in this bioregion.

a. Interview and survey data revealed thatmany of our students do think aboutenvironmental quality and that they areconcerned about it. Of the surveyresponses, 74% fell on the “con-cerned” side of a seven-point scale,and 46% indicated the two highestlevels of concern.

b. Students majoring (or planning amajor) in health or natural scienceshowed the strongest degree ofconcern.

c. Students’ degree of concern appears tointensify as they progress from fresh-man to senior year.

2. Nonetheless, students indicated that theirknowledge of this region, its systems, and itsproblems is quite limited. They are very inter-ested in becoming better informed.

a. They admit that they don’t know whytheir knowledge is as limited as it is.Fewer than half the students indicatedthey had acquired environmentalknowledge in their formal (K-12)education. In on-campus discussions andin the survey, they commented that thislearning had primarily occurred in theirelementary school years.

b. When asked to rate their existingknowledge of 27 arenas of study aboutthe bioregion (e.g., energy, geography,plants and animals, social issues,sustainability), students generally ratedtheir knowledge as low.

c. At the same time, students are eager tobecome better informed. When askedwhat bioregional information (in these27 categories) they would like to learnmore about, the student surveyrespondents indicated the strongestinterest in

• plants, animals, and biodiversity• environmental health• energy use and conservation• history, language, and cultures• social issues (literacy, poverty, crime,

homelessness)• global climate change and its effects in

the region.


3. Sustainability (a rapidly emerging field thatinvolves learning to make decisions thatconsider the long-term future of economies,social equity, and the health of natural andhuman communities) is a new concept to moststudents but those familiar with it acknowl-edged its importance.

a. The students most energized by the ideaof sustainability were those few whohad substantial experience with anacademic program or a campussustainability task force.

b. Most other students admitted their lackof familiarity with the term.

c. Online survey-takers rated their knowl-edge of sustainability as generally low,but indicated interest in learning more.

4. When asked specifically what kind of learningexperiences they would recommend, studentsfrom first-year to senior were remarkablyconsistent. They wanted opportunities to

a. Engage in community-based learningand field study. Experiential learningwas identified as centrally important fortranslating “classroom knowledge” to“the real world.”

b. Explore the major issues facing theregion.

c. Have learning experiences with which“to feel more hopeful about the future.”Asked what these experiences wouldactually look like, students said theywanted to

• “Learn what we can do, personally”• understand how agencies, non-govern-

mental organizations, and workplacesactually work on problems

• participate in projects that make posi-tive contributions to agencies, organiza-tions, or communities.

I never realized . . . how disconnected I really am from the elements in my life.I didn’t know where my water came from, how my home was heated,

what the air quality was, or what contaminants were in my soil.


I would like to learn more about the bioregion’s history and cultures,environmental issues, and civic issues—

and I would like to be more aware of how I can help.



What Faculty and StaffMembers Told Us

We gleaned faculty and staff perspectivesfrom two sources: meetings with approximately400 faculty, staff, and senior administrators atthe eighteen institutions (on twenty-one actualcampuses); and results of a detailed onlinesurvey completed by 131 faculty and staffmembers, all of whom are engaged in environ-mental or sustainability studies orsustainability-related campus projects. Theonline survey was not designed as a randomsample; rather, the intent was to learn whatalready-engaged faculty and staff members aredoing now and to hear their advice aboutdirections this initiative might take. The surveyand its findings are posted at the Curriculum forthe Bioregion website.

1. Faculty members with whom we met ex-pressed strong interest in the idea of abioregional approach to curriculum develop-ment. Many faculty members said that theconcepts of “bioregional learning” and“sustainability” offer a fresh way to focus onwhat is important, “a new way of aligningour practices around larger, more inclusiveideas.” Those faculty members who currentlyinvolve students in on-campus sustainabilityprojects and wider “study of the local”reinforced how valuable it is for students to

• have direct experiences with the naturalworld, the built environment, and rel-evant communities and leaders—to havethe abstract become real and to builddeeper, personal connections with localplaces and people

• begin with current local issues withwhich they already have some familiarityand then “scale up,” building outward tomore global concerns

• learn how local/regional problems arebeing addressed by participating in thoseissues

• have enough time to build a richer under-standing of issues, especially their histori-cal, cultural, scientific, political, andeconomic dimensions.

2. Faculty and staff members overwhelminglyemphasized that they themselves need tolearn more about the bioregion and about theemerging field of “sustainability education”and to translate that learning into curriculumdevelopment. The following topics receivedthe most interest among respondents to theonline survey; at least 75% indicated interestin learning more about these topics, and morethan 80% indicated interest in the first sixtopics in the list.

• The campus as a bioregional resource forits communities

• Sustainability concepts and practices ingeneral

• Energy use and conservation• Social issues (such as literacy, poverty,

homelessness)• Justice issues (social, economic,

environmental)• Ethics and civic responsibility

• Plants, animals and biodiversity• Environmental health• History, languages and cultures• Pollution and solid waste issues• Climate change in the region• Environmental education and

communications• Land use, planning, and transportation

issues• Hydrology, watershed analysis, water

resource protection


3. Even the most interested and committed facultyand staff members acknowledged these chal-lenges

a. The limited knowledge most students haveof their local landscapes. Geographicknowledge was seen as particularly weakamong students; the student self-reportedsurvey data confirmed this.

b. The limitations of their own knowledge:faculty members remarked how quicklyissues are changing, how quicklysustainability is emerging as a field, andhow challenging it is to stay current.

c. The need to find effective ways to engagestudents in learning about complex issueswithout their feeling intellectually oremotionally overwhelmed.

d. The scarcity of time and resources: bothfaculty and staff commented on howstretched they feel and how stretched theirinstitutions are. The yearning for morereflective time and space was nearlyuniversal.

e. Professional tensions: several were identi-fied, including serving the department/preparing students in the major and servingthe larger undergraduate population throughgeneral education courses; how study in themajor should be shaped, particularly whatpriority should be given to disciplinary orinterdisciplinary skills; research expecta-tions and reward systems that often favor“study of the far-away and exotic” over“study of the local”; and, as several put it,“It is challenging to reconcile our profes-sional training as ‘objective scholars’ with agrowing personal sense of urgency regard-ing local and global problems.” Manyindicated they want to explore these ten-sions with colleagues.

4. Faculty and staff engaged in this work said theywere eager to learn what their colleagues areteaching, not only on other campuses, but theirown as well. They recognize that new, interdis-ciplinary curriculum calls for reaching outbeyond the choir. There is a tangible interest inbuilding both new curriculum and new relation-ships with colleagues as well as reaching intothe community for learning opportunities andteaching partners.

I treasure opportunities to meet and learn from others doing similar work.In this, as in so many other endeavors, we often find ourselves out here on our own.

–Victor Nolet, Associate Professor, Secondary Education,Western Washington University

We need training for us to be better able to teach students in these ways.

–Grace Sparks, Biology Instructor,Seattle Central Community College


Institutional Building Blocksand Areas for Growth

Colleges and universities everywhere use anarray of tools for strengthening student learning,faculty development, and curriculum change. Frominformation provided by our steering committeemembers and through our interviews, we learnedwhich supports are already in place relative tobioregional learning, and imagined how they couldbe marshalled on behalf of new curriculum devel-opment and transformation.

1. Public Statements of Commitment

One of the most powerful ways that institutionscan communicate leadership, vision, values, andstrategic directions is through mission statementsand other formal declarations. Several of themission statements of the eighteen participatinginstitutions do express significant public commit-ment to civic engagement, community service, andenvironmental care. Four mission statements (ofCascadia Community College, Pacific LutheranUniversity, Skagit Valley College, and WesternWashington University) speak directly to environ-mental stewardship. Six (Cascadia, EdmondsCommunity College, North Seattle CommunityCollege, Skagit Valley College, The EvergreenState College, and Western Washington University)state a commitment to sustainability. Communityservice or civic engagement appears in the missionstatements of eleven campuses (Antioch UniversitySeattle, Pacific Lutheran University, Seattle CentralCommunity College, Seattle University, SkagitValley College, The Evergreen State College,University of Puget Sound, the three University ofWashington campuses, and Western WashingtonUniversity). The University of Washington systemhas a special statement on environmental steward-ship that appears on the university’s missionstatement web page. Two university presidents, atPacific Lutheran University and the University ofPuget Sound, have signed the Talloires Declaration,thereby joining more than 300 campus presidentsworldwide committed to environmentally sustain-able colleges and universities.

2. Campus Sustainability Initiatives

As functioning communities, college cam-puses have enormous potential as demonstrationsites and local learning laboratories for sustain-able practices. With roads, lawns, parking lots,classrooms and office buildings, eateries, andenergy, water, and waste systems, they mirror thefunctions of small cities. Through courseworkand student clubs, students around the countryare assisting campuses in taking steps andmeasuring progress toward sustainability. In ourbioregion, most campuses are beginning to adoptsustainable purchasing and management prac-tices. Eight campuses have formed sustainabilitytask forces in the past two years. Nine campuseshave begun to conceive of their landscapes asoutdoor learning labs—as models of sustainabledesign, wildlife habitat, or research sites.Sustainability outreach projects involving thewider campus neighborhood are also emerging.Several student clubs have taken the lead in this.Nevertheless, on most campuses, integratingthese achievements into the curriculum is still inits infancy. Interest in “sustainability across thecurriculum” is just starting to emerge.

3. General EducationCurriculum Offerings

Often composing a year or more of lower-division academic credit, general educationcoursework represents a significant opportunityfor bioregional learning and civic engagement.Although often criticized for lacking in purposeor coherence, general education programs can beexciting, formative arenas where students ex-plore complex issues and develop the integrativeskills necessary for social responsibility. Manycolleges and universities throughout the nationare reforming their general education curricula tohighlight the connections across disciplines andto encourage development of critical thinkingand holistic understanding. The immediacy,


relevance, and urgency of bioregional issues andthe local dimensions of global sustainabilityeasily lend themselves to general educationofferings.

While coursework with environmentalsustainability foci are well developed for majorsand professional/technical degree programs,opportunities for students to acquire bioregionalknowledge in their general education classes areoften under-developed and fragmented. Neitherenvironmental literacy nor sustainability is yet ageneral-education requirement at any campus inthe bioregion. There are random, individualcourses with bioregional content. But, unlessstudents are majoring in an environmental field(such as environmental science/studies, geogra-phy, natural resources management, or commu-nity planning), they will encounter little, if anyenvironmental or sustainability content in theircoursework. Consequently, most students haveminimal opportunity to explore the major issuesfacing the bioregion. Few faculty members arethinking about this gap in the curriculum—eitheras a problem or as an important educationalopportunity for heightening student interest,deepening civic engagement, or strengtheninggeneral education programs overall.

4. Opportunities forInterdisciplinary Learning

In our interviews and surveys, faculty mem-bers repeatedly identified interdisciplinarylearning as the ideal for enabling students to seethe multi-dimensional nature of complex issues.Interdisciplinary studies are already hallmarks ofinstitutions throughout the Puget Sound region.Five campuses in the Puget Sound region(Antioch University Seattle, Fairhaven College atWestern Washington University, The EvergreenState College, The University of WashingtonBothell and University of Washington Tacoma)have interdisciplinary curricular missions. Sev-eral community colleges require interdisciplinarystudies for an Associate of Arts (transfer) degree.Fourteen of the eighteen campuses offer learningcommunity programs (where courses are linkedaround interdisciplinary themes and enroll a

common cohort of students); these are substantialinitiatives on eight campuses. Learning communi-ties not only offer students integrative learning, thefaculty collaboration in them provides an importantvenue for faculty development. Interdisciplinarycourses and learning community programs withbioregional themes have been occasionally taughton all campuses: these offerings could be scaled updramatically.

5. Bioregional Expertise

At every participating institution, there isabundant historical and contemporary knowledgeregarding the ecological and human communitiesof this region. However, the incorporation of thisknowledge in general education courses could begreatly expanded. The University of Washingtonhas the most extensive capacity in terms of researchexpertise and cross-unit working groups. Its Pro-gram on the Environment and the UW EarthInitiative, which develops larger research, teaching,and service partnerships with faculty, staff, stu-dents, and the wider community, are promisingresources. There are also scores of regional agen-cies and non-governmental organizations that arerich information sources for current issues andapproaches to problem solving. Beyond sporadictopical conferences and research forums, we needvehicles for faculty across disciplines and institu-tions to access these resources and then developand share teaching ideas.

6. Service Learning andCivic Engagement Initiatives

Because service learning and civic engagementinitiatives connect student coursework to local andregional community-based projects or publicissues, they offer a natural platform for bioregionallearning and engagement. In the past fifteen years,more than half the campuses have initiated suchprograms. Eleven of the eighteen campuses wevisited have formal offices to support servicelearning. These play important roles in developingrelationships with community organizations andbrokering student-learning projects. Most involvestudents in environmental projects, largely because


funding has come from the Corporation forNational and Community Service, one of whosefive major focus areas is the environment. Wash-ington Campus Compact, the statewide coalitionthat supports service learning and civic engage-ment, plays an important role in assisting thesecampuses with program development and capac-ity building.

In the Puget Sound region, major bioregionalservice learning projects have focused on water-shed protection, with longstanding collaborationsamong campuses, local agencies, and citizenorganizations. Outstanding examples includeEdmonds Community College in Lund’s GulchCreek, North Seattle Community College inThornton Creek, Pacific Lutheran University inthe Clover Creek watershed, and Western Wash-ington University and Sehome High School inConnolly and Padden creeks. More recently, thethree University of Washington campuses haveestablished a Restoration Ecology Network (UW-REN) that engages upper-division undergraduatesin a yearlong capstone sequence of classes in thetheory and practice of conservation and restora-tion ecology. In addition, many more facultymembers are involving students in short-termpartnerships related to community planning,environmental health, sustainable agriculture, andenvironmental education. Many of these partner-ships could be developed further.

Less common are initiatives explicitly orientedto civic engagement, involving students in the

study of public policy issues and democraticprocesses. Yet, several such initiatives haveemerged in the past three years, taking differentforms. Bellevue Community College’s Center forLiberal Learning and Edmonds CommunityCollege’s Arts, Culture, and Civic Engagementinitiative have focused on arts and cultural lifeand the creation of occasions for communitydialogue. The University of Puget Sound’s Centerfor Civic Scholarship seeks to engage faculty andstudents in civic research-and-action projects inthe South Puget Sound region. Western Washing-ton University’s American Democracy Project (inpartnership with the American Association ofState Colleges and Universities) offers a variety ofprograms to involve students in exploration of anddialogue on civic issues. Projects such as thesecould be important catalysts for bioregionalengagement.

7. Support for Faculty andCurriculum Development

Research and development centers for teachingimprovement and curriculum reform have alwaysbeen modest in scale in institutions of highereducation, yet they serve as critical incubationsites for new initiatives in curriculum and teach-ing. Ten of our eighteen Puget Sound campuses(five community colleges and five universities)have established teaching and learning centerswith designated staff to orient new faculty mem-

I would like to involve students and community-members more in “citizen science”where data are gathered and projects are carried out by community/student members,

results are analyzed and interpreted, and next stages planned cooperatively.

–Martha Groom, Associate Professor, Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences,University of Washington Bothell


bers and offer consultation on curriculum devel-opment, teaching approaches, and assessment. Inrecent years, these offices have engaged facultyprimarily with learning outcomes assessment,writing-across-the-curriculum, diversity andpluralism in the curriculum, the development ofonline learning, and the scholarship of teachingand learning. In addition, most campuses cur-rently have some kind of mechanism in place sothat faculty members can apply for stipends forcourse redesign or new course development.These resources are largely seen by faculty asquite modest and variable from year to year,dependent on college budgets, institutionalcurriculum development priorities, and grant-related projects. Occasionally, major initiativesenable some faculty to work on curriculumreform: in recent years, special faculty and cur-riculum development projects have focused onglobalizing the curriculum, service learning, andcitizenship and social justice. Workingcollaboratively with service learning and civic-engagement initiatives, faculty developmentcenters could play critical roles in supporting newcurriculum development and community-basedpedagogies.

8. Inter-institutional Support for Facultyand Curriculum Development

For the past twenty years, several statewidenetworks and initiatives in Washington have madethis state nationally recognized for curriculumreform activity. As of a result, there is well-established ground on which to build and areadiness of campuses to respond to new initia-tives. The Washington Center for Improvingthe Quality of Undergraduate Education isboth a statewide and national resource center forlearning community development. The Washing-ton Center also supported the first wave of calcu-lus reform in the early 1990s and still convenes an

annual retreat on the teaching of mathematics.Additionally, the Washington Center has longsupported academic success for under-representedstudents; in the 1990s, as one strand of this work,a Ford Foundation-funded initiative in collabora-tion with the University of Washington involvedtwenty-six campuses in the integration of Ameri-can pluralism into the general education curricu-lum.

Other networks in Washington have success-fully initiated additional reforms. Washington’sState Board for Community and TechnicalColleges leads a multi-faceted statewide effort tostrengthen learning outcomes’ assessment. Sinceits founding in 1992, Washington CampusCompact has supported campuses in the develop-ment of service learning programs. Sustainabilityhas emerged in one new inter-institutional projectin the Puget Sound region led by the Associationfor the Advancement of Sustainability inHigher Education (formerly called Education forSustainability-Western Network). Faculty andstaff members from eight baccalaureate campuseshave met for the past three years to share theirwork of sustainable campus practices and curricu-lum infusion. One outgrowth of this project is aninter-institutional working group developingcommon protocols for measurement and reportingof “sustainability indicators” related to campusoperations. This year, The Evergreen StateCollege partnered with five other colleges anduniversities in the Northwest to develop teachingcases on issues facing Native American communi-ties and tribes, many of which will focus onnatural resource and environmental topics.

All of these inter-institutional initiatives havebeen vital stimuli to curriculum reform; they havebrought isolated individuals into communities ofpractice, stimulated experimentation, dissemi-nated promising approaches, and created supportsystems. And they are logical leadership sites forcurriculum development and disseminationprojects.


learning “landscape literacy” in a range ofgeneral education classes that reach largenumbers of undergraduates. Faculty teach-ing English composition, American studies,introductory biology, economics, andbusiness and were particularly interested ininfusing bioregional material into theircourses.

Faculty suggested creating “teaching cases”(that is, narrative stories of complex prob-lems that stimulate student research, analy-sis, and discussion). They also requestedprotocols for doing community-basedresearch with students. Additionally, facultyrecommended that internship and servicelearning be expanded at organizationsaddressing bioregional problems andsolutions.

While interest in the study of sustainabilitycame primarily from environmental studiesfaculty, a broad range of other teachers alsoexpressed interest in this topic, from disci-plines such as political science, psychology,sociology, global studies, English composi-tion, and the visual arts. Think tank partici-pants pointed out that because the idea ofsustainability is still so new for moststudents and faculty, there should be furtherdialogue about what constitutes“sustainability literacy” for the generalstudent and what “sustainable practices”should look like. Examples of learningactivities need to be disseminated.

c. The expansion of opportunities for fieldlearning, especially related to neededfield research. Faculty members agree onthe value of learning experiences beyondthe classroom and campus; they also

Recommendations

Four major recommendations emerged outof our campus interviews, online surveys, thethink tank, and steering committee meetings.Additional suggestions related to these recom-mendations are provided on the Curriculum forthe Bioregion website.

1. Expand and strengthen opportunitiesfor undergraduates to learn about thisbioregion and its issues, especially in intro-ductory and general education courses.These specific approacheswere suggested.

a. The development of interdisciplinarycurriculum with bioregional themes.Faculty across the disciplines said the ideal“curriculum for the bioregion” should beinterdisciplinary. They cited the need forinterdisciplinary courses or learning com-munities (classes linked around a themeduring a given term that students takecollectively) that would explore such topicsas bioregional geography, history, literature,and cultures; issues facing the region;human communities and community health;and sustainability, both global and local.Additional ideas included situating issues inscience in their social science context;using the arts and humanities to illuminateconnections to place; and linking environ-mental quality and social justice.

b. The creation of bioregional andsustainability learning activities forinfusion into general education coursesthat reach large numbers of lower-division students. Concerned for students’widely varying general knowledge of thegeography, cultures, and history of thisregion, faculty pointed to the need for


acknowledge that field- and community-based learning is logistically challenging.They suggested focusing on the develop-ment of local field learning opportunitiesthat are project-based and that generateuseful information for local or regionalagencies. Faculty and students could gatherand report data to those agencies in anongoing relationship.

2. Create bioregional learning opportunitiesfor faculty members.

A surprisingly large number of faculty andstaff members said they are eager to gain moregrounding about this bioregion, both its naturaland social systems. They also wanted to learnmore about regional issues and to build relation-ships with involved stakeholders and organiza-tions. They asked for workshops or summerinstitutes involving community-based or field-based learning, especially on the topics men-tioned earlier. They also remarked that engagingregional learning opportunities would be ideal forreaching beyond the choir to their faculty col-leagues. Faculty members involved with K-12education outreach projects pointed out that in-service schoolteachers have the same need tolearn about the bioregion and sustainability thatcollege teachers do; they suggested that theseopportunities be extended to K-12 teachers aswell.

3. Develop our campuses as bioregionallearning laboratories, so students can bothstudy and contribute to the campus land-scape and sustainable campus practices.

Those faculty, staff, and students who hadformed partnerships around sustainable campuspractices were enthusiastic about the potentialof campuses as laboratories for learning. Theyrecommended that campus sustainability initia-tives be expanded to involve more students andclasses. They also recommended expanding ourconceptions of campus landscapes as bioregionaldemonstration sites and teaching resources.

4. Create a clearinghouse for sharing ofresources and teaching approaches.

A central clearinghouse is needed to coordi-nate activities and share technical expertise andpromising practices, opportunities, andresources. Suggestions included web-basedresources (bioregional information, syllabi,recommended readings and videos, ideas forstudent workshops and projects, out-of-classassignments) and a coordinating function (toestablish inter-institutional projects and act as aconvening authority).

I would like to see a course that encourages students to use sustainability conceptsto design and complete campus projects. These projects would have a substantial service-

learning component that would benefit the campus and local community.

–Rose McKenney, Assistant Professor, Geosciences and Environmental Studies,Pacific Lutheran University


Next Steps

These recommendations ask us to cross ourdisciplinary and institutional boundaries, forgepartnerships, and learn from one another—bothon campus and in our communities. Despitethe challenges, the feedback and recommenda-tions from our campus interviews and the thinktank reveal an enthusiasm and readiness to moveforward collectively. With continued funding fromThe Russell Family Foundation for the 2006-07academic year, we at the Washington Center willmove forward on these recommendations.

a. We will begin making existing bioregionalcurriculum resources accessible through theWashington Center website, highlightingthose model programs that successfullymake campus-community connections.

b. We will disseminate promisingapproaches and practices that are already inplace through two daylong workshops andtwo overnight curriculum planning retreatson the integration of bioregional issues andsustainability into general educationcourses.

c. We will begin acting on the curriculumdevelopment recommendations of thisproject’s planning phase with several inter-

institutional working groups. More ambi-tious faculty- and curriculum-developmentprojects will require new resources, soseveral major grant proposals will emerge.

d. We will make these opportunities availableto all the Washington Center memberinstitutions in the Puget Sound bioregion byinviting twelve additional campuses to beinvolved with this project.

e. We will continue to work with our steeringcommittee to shape this initiative andidentify new opportunities and partners.

If it is to be successful, Curriculum for theBioregion will be both a process of inter-institu-tional and campus-community collaboration, anda set of products—a collection of exciting ideasfor curriculum and student engagement. Webelieve that this initiative will create new ways foreducators to collaborate, both with colleagues andcommunities. More important, we believe thatCurriculum for the Bioregion will create a differ-ent kind of college graduate, one who is notsimply aware of problems but motivated by hopeto participate in the collective search for in-formed, realistic solutions. We welcome addi-tional ideas and suggestions.

None of us are experts; we all need to learn together, the issues canquickly seem large and overwhelming; we each just need a place to start.

-Kim McNamara, Instructor in Business and Director,Shelton Campus, Olympic College


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Pacific Lutheran UniversityRose McKenney, Assistant Professor of

Geosciences/Environmental StudiesIone Crandall, Director, Center for Public Service

Peninsula CollegeBill Eaton, Senior Vice President

Pierce CollegeKaren Harding, Chemistry Instructor

Seattle Central Community CollegeGrace Sparks, Biology Instructor

Seattle UniversityTrileigh Tucker, Director, Environmental Studies, and

Associate Professor, Environmental StudiesDavid Brubaker, Director, Environmental Studies,

Associate Professor of Biology (retired)

Skagit Valley CollegeClaus Svendsen, Department Chair, Environmental

Conservation

The Evergreen State CollegeHeather Heying, Faculty Member in Environmental

Studies, Olympia CampusTyrus Smith, Faculty Member in Environmental Studies,

Tacoma Campus

The Russell Family FoundationNancy McKay, Environmental Sustainability Manager

University of Puget SoundDaniel Sherman, Assistant Professor, Political Science/

Environmental Studies

University of Washington BothellMike Gillespie, Senior Lecturer, Interdisciplinary Arts &

Sciences and Professor Emeritus, Philosophy,University of Nebraska-Omaha

University of Washington SeattleDavid Secord, Director, University of Washington

Program on the EnvironmentMichaelann Jundt, Director, Carlson Leadership and

Public Service Center

University of Washington TacomaTom Carlson, Assistant Professor, Urban Studies

Washington Campus CompactJulie Muylleart, State Network Director

Western Washington UniversityBradley Smith, Dean, Huxley College of the Environment

Whidbey InstituteLarry Daloz, Associate Director

Our special thanks to The Russell Family Foundationfor supporting the inquiry and planning phase for theCurriculum for the Bioregion initiative. We are gratefulalso to the initiative’s steering committee for their helpfulsuggestions and leadership throughout this planningphase; the Northwest Association for EnvironmentalStudies and Washington State University’s Center forTeaching, Learning, and Technology for their support ofthe online surveys for students and for faculty and staff;to Elizabeth Scott, former Graduate Program Coordinator,University of Washington Program on the Environment,for her analysis of the student survey data; and to KrisBulcroft, Ann Carlson, Susan Crate, Kate Davies, LarryDaloz, Lynn Dunlap, Karen Harding, James MacGregor,Nancy McKay, Rose McKenney, Kim McNamara, AnneMartin, Julie Muylleart, David Secord, Daniel Sherman,Barbara Leigh Smith, Susan Starbuck, Jennifer Swidler,and Trileigh Tucker for their helpful comments.

Curriculum for theBioregion Initiative

Steering Committee 2005–06Antioch University SeattleKate Davies, Core Faculty in Environment

and CommunitySusan Starbuck, Core Faculty, Center for Programs in

Education

Association for the Advancement of Sustainabilityin Higher EducationJudy Walton, Executive Director

Bellevue Community CollegeRob Viens, Instructor in Geology/Environmental Studies

Cascadia Community CollegeJohn Van Leer, Faculty, Natural Sciences

Edmonds Community CollegeAnne Martin, Sociology Instructor

Environmental Education Associationof WashingtonAbby Ruskey, Executive Director

North Seattle Community CollegePeter Lortz, Biology Instructor

Olympic CollegeKim McNamara, Director, Shelton Campus


Project StaffWashington Center for Improving the Qualityof Undergraduate Education atThe Evergreen State Collegewww.evergreen.edu/washcenterJean MacGregor, Senior Scholar, and Director,

Curriculum for the Bioregion InitiativeEmily Lardner, Co-Director, Washington CenterGillies Malnarich, Co-Director, Washington CenterJodi Patrykus, Research Assistant, and MPA StudentJennifer Swidler, Research Assistant, and MPA Student

Participants at the Think TankHeld at the University of Washington Centerfor Urban Horticulture, February 2, 2006

Campus TeamsAntioch University SeattleGail Alexander, Student, Learning and Teaching CooperativeKate Davies, Associate Director, Center for Creative ChangeMary Lou Finley, Faculty, Liberal StudiesRandy Morris, Faculty, Liberal StudiesJonathan Scherch, Faculty, Center for Creative ChangeSusan Starbuck, Faculty, Center for Creative ChangeSue Woehrlin, Faculty, Liberal Studies

Bellevue Community CollegeDiane Douglas, Executive Director, Center for Liberal ArtsMike Hanson, Instructor, Life SciencesEwan Magie, Instructor, Arts & HumanitiesTom Nielson, Division Chair, Arts & HumanitiesRob Viens, Instructor and Program Chair, Physical &

Life Science

Cascadia Community CollegeJared Leising, Faculty, HumanitiesMidori Mizuba, Associate Faculty, Natural SciencesJohn Van Leer, Faculty, Natural Sciences

Edmonds Community CollegeRick Asher, Dean, Humanities & Social Science DivisionsTim Hohn, Instructor, HorticultureHolly Hughes, Instructor, EnglishAnne Martin, Instructor, SociologyMelissa Newell, Co-Director, Arts, Culture & Civic

Engagement, Arts Instructor

North Seattle Community CollegeMichael Brokaw, Head GroundskeeperTom Griffith, Dean, Math, Science & Social Sciences DivisionMeredith Lohr, Instructor, Geology, and Coordinator of

SustainabilityPeter Lortz, Instructor, Biology

Olympic CollegeSusan Digby, Faculty, GeographyKim McNamara, Director, Shelton CampusArlene Plevin, Faculty, English

Pacific Lutheran UniversityCharles Bergman, Professor, EnglishMaxine Herbert Hill, Director of Academic InternshipsRose McKenney, Assistant Professor, Geosciences/

Environmental Studies

Peninsula CollegeAlice Derry, Professor, English/German/LiteratureWilliam Eaton, Senior Vice President for InstructionBrian Hauge, Professor, BiologyJeff Mauger, Professor, Anthropology/Sociology

Pierce College - Fort SteilacoomKaren Harding, Instructor, ChemistryRon May, Chair, Science DivisionLaurie Shuster, Librarian

Pierce College - PuyallupChristie Flynn, Librarian

Seattle Central Community CollegeMohammad Al-Madani, Instructor, Humanities/Social SciencesPatti Gorman, Service Learning CoordinatorPete Knutson, Instructor, AnthropologyGillian Schultz, Instructor, Science & MathGrace Sparks, Instructor, Science & Math

Seattle UniversityDavid Brubaker, Director, Environmental StudiesTrileigh Tucker, Associate Professor, Environmental Studies

Skagit Valley CollegeClaus Svendsen, Department Chair, Environmental

Conservation

Skagit Valley College-Whidbey Island CampusBob Holmberg, Instructor, Art

The Evergreen State CollegeDon Bantz, Vice President and ProvostAmy Cook, Member of the FacultyHeather Heying, Member of the FacultyCarri LeRoy, Member of the FacultyLin Nelson, Member of the FacultyNancy Parkes, Member of the FacultyTom Womeldorff, Academic Dean

University of Puget SoundJoel Elliott, Associate Professor, BiologyBarry Goldstein, Professor, GeologyLisa Johnson, Assistant Professor, Business

and Environmental StudiesBruce Mann, Professor of Economics and Director of Civic

Scholarship InitiativeDaniel Sherman, Assistant Professor, Environmental Studies


University of Washington SeattleMichelle Hall, Undergraduate Program Coordinator,

Program on the EnvironmentStephanie Harrington, Executive Director, UW Earth InitiativeTom Hinckley, Professor, College of Forest ResourcesElizabeth Scott, Graduate Program Coordinator,

Program on the EnvironmentAmy Snover, Research Scientist, Joint Institute for

Study of the Atmosphere and OceansRachel Vaughn, Assistant Director, Carlson Leadership

& Public Service Center

University of Washington BothellMike Gillespie, Senior Lecturer, Interdisciplinary

Arts & SciencesWarren Gold, Associate Professor, Interdisciplinary

Arts & SciencesMartha Groom, Associate Professor, Interdisciplinary

Arts & SciencesKanta Kochhar-Lindgren, Assistant Professor,

Interdisciplinary Arts & Sciences

University of Washington TacomaTom Carlson, Assistant Professor, Urban StudiesGeorge Mobus, Associate Professor, Computing

& Software Systems InstituteDavid Morris, Associate Professor, Interdisciplinary

Arts & Sciences

Washington Center for Improving the Quality ofUndergraduate Education The Evergreen State CollegeSharilyn Howell, Program CoordinatorEmily Lardner, Co-DirectorJean MacGregor, Project Director, Curriculum for the BioregionGillies Malnarich, Co-DirectorJodi Patrykus, Research Assistant

Regional InitiativesAssociation for the Advancement of Sustainabilityin Higher EducationJudy Walton, Executive Director

Cascade Land ConservancyJohn Howell, Board Chair and Partner, Cedar River Group

Cascadia Region Green Building CouncilDeb Guenther, Board Chair and Principal, Mithun

EcoEncoreKristen Spangler, Executive Director

Environmental Education Association of WashingtonAbby Ruskey, Executive Director

Institute for Children’s Environmental HealthKate Davis, Board Member

National Wildlife Federation-Western RegionGretchen Muller, Regional Education Program ManagerStephanie Stowell, Director of Education Programs

Northwest Environment Watch/ Sightline InstituteChristine Hanna, Managing Director

Office of Civil Rights and Environmental JusticeEnvironmental Protection AgencyRunning Grass, Program Manager, Environmental Justice

Puget Sound Action TeamBrad Ack, Director

Shared Strategy for Puget SoundJim Kramer, Executive Director

Sustainable SeattleChantal Stevens, Executive Director

The Interra ProjectJon Ramer, Executive Director

The Russell Family FoundationNancy McKay, Environmental Program ManagerRichard Woo, Executive Director

Washington Biodiversity CouncilLynn Helbrecht, Executive Coordinator

Washington Campus CompactJulie Muyllaert, State Network Director

Washington Sustainable Food and Farming NetworkMaryon Attwood, Director

We are for the academic success of all students.Increasing access to significant learning experiences forstudents, especially those under-represented in highereducation is our primary goal. The measure of our successover time will be improvements not only in retention rates,but also academic achievement and graduation rates.

We work at the state, regional, and national levels withfaculty members, staff, and administrators to share goodpractices and carry out collaborative projects aimed atimproving undergraduate teaching and student learning.Through workshops, institutes, campus visits,publications, and a website, the Washington Centerpromotes projects aimed at enhancing the learning of allstudents. Through our website and publications, andthrough campus visits and consultations, we connectpeople, projects, and resources.

Our workWe focus our work in four major areas: curricularinitiatives, including developmental education,quantitative literacy, and curriculum for the bioregion;equity and diversity, including the organizing of an annualretreat for campus teams; faculty enrichment, including thescholarship of teaching and learning; and learningcommunities, including national summer institutes and aweb-based national learning community directory andresources.

Our assumptionsThree major assumptions inform our practice:(1) collaboration is key both within and across institutions,(2) effective educational practices need to be recognizedand built upon, and (3) systemic long-term change resultsfrom small-scale, locally determined changes in practicethat are carefully documented and nurtured.

Mandate and fundingThe Washington State Legislature established theWashington Center in 1985 as a public service centerof The Evergreen State College, with a mandate towork with two- and four-year higher educationinstitutions and other educators throughout the state toimprove the quality of undergraduate education. TheExxon and Ford Foundations provided start-upfunding; since 1987, the Legislature has funded theCenter’s work.

Consortium members and staffWashington Center is organized as a statewideconsortium with a national reach. Our fifty-onemember institutions include thirty-three communityand technical colleges, six public four-year institutions,one tribal college, and eleven independent colleges inWashington State. Our core staff comprises two co-directors and two support staff.

CollaborationIn addition to organizing initiatives, the Centercollaborates in other state, regional, national, andinternational educational reform initiatives. Weregularly seek grants for special projects. The NationalCouncil on Education in the Disciplines, the Williamand Flora Hewlett Foundation, The Pew CharitableTrusts, the Ford Foundation, the National ScienceFoundation, the Mathematical Association of America,the Washington State Board for Community andTechnical Colleges, the Fund for Improvement of Post-Secondary Education, and The Russell FamilyFoundation have supported Washington Center’s work.

Published by theWashington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education

The Evergreen State College2700 Evergreen Parkway NW, Olympia, WA 98505

360-867-6611 www.evergreen.edu/washcenter

Co-DirectorsEmily Lardner and Gillies Malnarich

Senior Scholar and Director, Curriculum for the Bioregion InitiativeJean MacGregor

Curriculum for the Bioregion Student StaffJodi Patrykus and Jennifer Swidler

Editing and LayoutEsmé Ryan and Mary Geraci

The inquiry and planning phase of the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiativewas made possible by a grant from The Russell Family Foundation (www.trff.org).

To learn more about the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiative,visit www.evergreen.edu/washcenter.

For citation purposes, please use:Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education. 2006.

Curriculum for the Bioregion: Connecting What We Learn to Where We Live. A Report onthe Inquiry and Planning Phase of a New Initiative of the Washington Center.

Jean MacGregor, ed. Olympia, WA:The Evergreen State College.

This document is printed on recycled, acid-free paper using agri-based inks.

About the cover:Tom Carlson, Assistant Professor in Geography and Geographic Information Systems in the Urban Studies Department at the

University of Washington Tacoma, created this map for the Curriculum for the Bioregion initiative. The map’s bioregionalboundaries were derived from the watershed units that drain into Puget Sound. The land cover types were derived from a

2001 Landsat 7 satellite image.

curriculum for the bioregion - intranet home

Documents