Laserfiche WebLink
The following tasks were assigned to focus groups: <br />o Review survey results and the survey summary report for accuracy and completeness. <br />o Develop a more in-depth understanding of the current status of water education in <br />Colorado. <br />o Evaluate gaps, barriers and opportunities in Colorado water education relative to <br />common water education objectives developed by each focus group. <br />o Produce meeting summaries describing the key aspects of current water education <br />programs in Colorado, outlining gaps, barriers and opportunities to optimize water <br />education for their audience. <br />Task Force Recommendations <br />Task Force Methodology <br />Task Force participants attended a series of meetings as the survey analysis, common <br />framework, opportunities and threats, and recommendations took form. Focus Group work <br />products were relayed to working groups and individual Task Force members to craft the <br />summaries and recommendations contained in this report. <br />In an effort to build support and create a report that is representative of the diverse water <br />education community, the draft report was posted to the CWCB website on July 8 and a public <br />comment period was held through July 16, 2008. A call for comments email was sent to the <br />CWCB email list, CAEE listserv, Project WET Facilitators Listserv, Colorado Science Educator <br />Network, and Colorado Watershed Assembly Inflow Newsletter. As well, task force and focus <br />group members were asked to comment on the report and send the call for comments to their <br />networks and colleagues. In addition to the 20 individuals who provided written comments on <br />the report, 24 people attended a two hour meeting on July 15 to provide input. Comments were <br />categorized, reviewed, and addressed as appropriate for this version of the report. <br />Considerations <br />There are many successful water education efforts happening within Colorado and in other <br />states. The Task Force drew upon experience with these programs to shape the <br />recommendations in this report; however, future efforts should identify best practices and <br />models from within Colorado and other states. <br />Despite attempts to include the agricultural community and the Department of Education in the <br />survey, focus groups, and task force; there was limited participation from these communities. <br />Future efforts to survey water education efforts or act on the recommendations in this report <br />should specifically reach out to representatives from the agricultural community and Department <br />of Education. At a minimum, input and participation from the Department of Agriculture, as well <br />as, various agricultural-related groups such as the Colorado Farm Bureau, the Rocky Mountain <br />Farmer's Union, the Colorado Dairy Farmer's Association, and Colorado Agricultural Water <br />Alliance (CAWA) should be sought so that the agricultural community is well represented. <br />The survey did not address cultural or socio-economic characteristics of the water education <br />providers or audiences. The inclusion of a diversity of perspectives will strengthen any future <br />efforts to improve water education. Therefore, future efforts should focus on obtaining input and <br />feedback from different cultures, races, genders, social groups, and ages. <br />Colorado is a large geographic area, with a varying amount and quality of water education <br />across regions. This report attempts to provide an overview of water education throughout the <br />WETF 2008 Final Report pg. 13 <br />