New trends in physics teaching, v.4; The ... - unesdoc - Unesco

United States
energy situation. There was an International Conference on Energy Education sponsored by the
University of Rhode Island in August, the Fourth Annual Practitioners Conference on Energy
Education in October, and the first National Conference on Energy Education in Detroit in
November.
This national conference is the first attempt to treat energy educators as a professional entity.
The response has been enthusiastic. The one day programme included concurrent sessions containing
in all about seventy invited papers, contributed papers, or workshops. The conference was
held simultaneously with the Annual Meeting of the National Council for the Social Studies and
attracted, in addition to the social studies teachers, several hundred. science teachers, teachers
from other disciplines and educators from the private sector.
These outward signs of successful growth have been accompanied by the maturation of national
materials development projects: NSTA’s PEEC, the DOE supported solar education projects at
the State University of New York-Albany and the University of Southern California, and private
efforts such as Energy and Man’s Environment (EME). New national efforts are gettidg underway
- the ‘Energex’ project [22], supported by San Diego Gas and Electric Co., Westinghouse and
ARCO, is a prime example.
It is ironic that this year of high visibility coincides with a major change in thjk nature, and
probably the level, of funding for energy education. Changes in the budget of DOE not only
reduce the small budget of the Education Division from $5 million in 1981 to $1.7 million in
1982, but more importantly, terminate the Energy Extension Service and the block grants - the
State Energy Conservation Programme, for instance - which provided most of the funds which
states used to fund energy education. And most states, having suffered revenue shortfalls in 1980,
not only cannot pick up slack, but are also initiating further cuts. The large reduction in 1982
funding for the DOE’S Conservation and Renewable Energy programmes will eliminate most of
the money supporting solar energy education. All in all, federal/state support for energy education
in 1981 wil be perhaps one tenth of its previous level. The remaining two to three million
dollars of DOE education money is allocated mostly for faculty development and graduate level
training programmes.
These budget reductions have two complementary motivations. The present administration is
committed to reducing federal spending. It views education as other than a federal responsibility
and thus DOE’S mission-oriented education programmes were a tempting target.
The reduction in the capabilities of groups like NSTA and the disappearance of the state
energy education co-ordinators who were supported by the block grants leaves several questions
whose answers will determine the future of energy education as an identifiable national endeavour.
Questions
1. Personnel support: With the reduction in federal and state support, who will provide the
communication, co-ordination, planning and general leadership now provided by energy educators
in State Energy or Education Agencies, and in national organizations such as NSTA, NCSS and
the Education Commission of the States (ECS)?
2. Networking: Where will support be found for the local, regional, and national meetings
that allow energy educators to share experiences and make efficient use of multiple efforts? Wil
there be support for a clearinghouse of energy education materials and resource people? Wil
there be support for a newsletter?
3. Teacher training: Where wil support be found for the teachers’ workshops which are so
153