Issuu

The Gunston School’s Environmental Strategic Plan

Committee Co-‐Chairs Jim Wright and Ryan Kelty

Steering Committee Chair, Emily Beck Jim Wright, Ryan Kelty, John Lewis, Christie Grabis

Committee Members Patrick Shoemaker, Betsy McCown, Jill Meyerhoff, Margaret Enloe, Alison Vooris, Lee Franklin, Ernie Darling, Joanna Pierce

January 2016

“Develop Gunston’s role as a regional and national leader for environmental teaching and learning” -‐The charge of Gunston’s 2014 Strategic Plan “We continue to educate the young for the most part as if there were no planetary emergency” -‐David Orr, Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect (2004)

Dear Gunston Community:

We are very pleased to present what we hope you find to be a powerful and important document: Gunston’s Environmental Strategic Plan.

As an educational institution, Gunston has the responsibility of preparing students to successfully navigate the challenges they will face in the future, and it is clear that environmental sustainability is one of the core challenges our students’ generation must address. Indeed, in this past year a remarkable global consensus regarding the environment was achieved: nearly 200 nations signed a landmark agreement to combat climate change; Pope Francis outlined the moral, theological, and ethical dimensions of sustainability in his widely-‐read encyclical Our Common Home; governments worldwide committed billions to renewable energy research; meanwhile, nearly every Fortune 500 company is pursuing sustainability strategies that were once reserved for niche companies and industries.

Yet as David Orr’s quote suggests, educational institutions have been slow to adapt their philosophies, curricula, programs, processes, and facilities to reflect the current environmental reality. Gunston’s Environmental Strategic Plan is an ambitious and far-‐reaching proposal that seeks to address each of these domains.

20 years ago, Gunston introduced an innovative environmental education initiative: The Bay Studies Program. The goal of Bay Studies was to create a dynamic and engaging week-‐long learning experience for students that also supported a bold and noble sustainability goal: saving the Chesapeake Bay. Thus, the Environmental Strategic Plan is a natural extension of Gunston’s institutional leadership in the realm of environmental education. The plan’s central goal is to move the concept of “sustainability”, especially environmental sustainability, even closer to the core of the school’s daily work. By doing so, we believe that Gunston will not only cultivate the values of leadership and stewardship within our students, but it will also provide institutional leadership to other schools as well.

Let us thank every member of the Environmental Strategic Planning committee for their supportive efforts, and we would like to acknowledge our Headmaster, Mr. John Lewis, as well as the school’s leadership team and faculty, for their dedication to the strategic process. Finally, let us acknowledge Gunston’s Sustainability Coordinator and primary author of this report, Ms. Emily Beck. Her tireless effort, deep knowledge, and passionate commitment shine through on every page.

Warm Regards, Mr. Jim Wright Dr. Ryan Kelty Vice Chair, Board of Trustees Member, Board of Trustees Co-‐Chairs, Environmental Strategic Planning Committee

Table of Contents Introduction: Educational Rationale 1. Gunston’s Curriculum and Internal Programs 1.1. Educational Philosophy and Pedagogy 1.1.1. What are “Educating for Sustainability” and “Environment-‐Based Education”? 1.1.2. “The New Content”: The Academic Fundamentals of Educating for Sustainability 1.1.3. Essential Questions to Guide Our Teaching and Learning 1.2. Gunston 2016: Our Current Curriculum and Program 1.2.1. Areas of Opportunity within our Curriculum and Internal Program Proposal: Educating for Sustainability Curriculum Working Group 1.2.2. Pathways for Student Engagement 1.2.3. Proposal: Educating for Sustainability Service Requirement 1.3. Professional Development Plan 1.3.1. Proposal: EfS Professional Development Fund 1.4. Five Year Plan to enhance our environment-‐based, educating for sustainability curriculum 2. Gunston’s Facilities and Operations 2.1. Mission Statement and Action Area Summary 2.2. Proposal: Guiding Principles for Decision Makers 2.3. Proposal: Sustainability Audit 2.4. Proposal: Landscape 2.4.1. Proposal: Issues and Opportunities on Gunston’s Campus 2.4.2. Pathways for Student Engagement 2.4.3. Summary of Critical Area Restrictions and Opportunities 2.5. Proposal: Signage and Monitoring 2.6. Proposal: Energy Solutions 2.7. Proposal: Waste Stream and Purchasing 2.8. Proposal: Sustainability Coordinator and Green Team 2.9. Proposal: Green Revolving Fund 2.10. Five Year Facilities and Operations Plan

Community Partnerships 3.1. Partnerships: Outreach and Collaboration 3.2. Strategic Partnerships 3.3. Philanthropy 3.4. Five Year Community Partnerships Plan

Appendix 1. Bibliography 2. Supporting Documents a. National Association of Independent Schools Sustainability Standard b. NAIS “How American Schools are Going Green” c. NAIS “Skilled by Nature” d. NAIS “How to Build a Sustainable Dining Program” e. Gunston’s Multum in Parvo 2014 f. Maryland Native Plants List g. Maryland Schoolyard Habitat Partnership “Common Qualities of Excellent Schoolyards”

Introduction: Educational Rationale

In the end, we will conserve only what we love. We will love only what we understand. We will understand only what we are taught. -‐-‐ Baba Dioum

Consistent with Gunston’s mission, which was revised and re-‐ratified in 2011, Gunston believes that stewardship of the natural environment is one of the most important skills we can teach to our students, and it is our expectation that an educational journey at Gunston will motivate students to pursue environmental stewardship practices throughout their lives. With this in mind, the Environmental Strategic Plan seeks to inspire the Gunston School community to fully embrace the stewardship values embedded within our mission statement: The Gunston School offers an intellectually rigorous, highly personalized, and nurturing college preparatory educational experience. Valuing a healthy balance between mind and body, a strong sense of community, the creative process, and our connection to the Chesapeake Bay, Gunston strives to educate ethically and environmentally minded scholars, citizens, and leaders for our globalized society.

Gunston’s opportunities for environmental education begin within our curriculum and then extend outward to encompass all members of our community, our physical campus, and our institutional partnerships. To address the charge put forth by Gunston’s Strategic Plan, approved by the Board of Trustees in 2014, we are also seeking to develop potential new programs that will elevate The Gunston School into a position as a “regional and national leader in environmental teaching and learning.” The Environmental Strategic Plan seeks to explore a series of key questions: How can we better engage our students with the core issues relating to “sustainability”, and how we can move this concept closer to the center of Gunston’s teaching and learning process? Where within our curriculum are students introduced to key global sustainability issues and how are these topics scaffolded within our curriculum? How can we structure meaningful educational experiences related to sustainability while continuing to ensure that such experiences remain rigorous, student-‐centered, and draw upon multiple modalities to offer rich learning opportunities that prepare students for college and beyond? We must also ask the question: How do our daily actions and our campus provide strong models for students to develop habits and mindsets that are crucial for the health of our planet? Our 32-‐acre campus provides a unique setting for student learning and can serve as classroom, laboratory, wildlife habitat, sports field, and ambassador for stewardship in action. Thus, how can we maximize this resource by implementing innovative projects that cultivate both high-‐impact learning experiences and a strong revenue stream? Considering the ethos of our mission and the scope of our campus resources, it is also important to consider the question: How might Gunston serve a wider range of students? Within this report, ideas ranging from hosting a youth leadership symposium to piloting a high school semester focused on the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, have the potential to benefit not just current and future Gunston students, but young men and women from the wider community. Thus, working across many fronts over the next five years, we can achieve the goal that we set in our strategic plan: Develop Gunston’s role as a regional and national leader in environmental teaching and learning. 9

Section 1: Gunston’s Curriculum and Internal Programs

1.1 Educational Philosophy and Pedagogy The Gunston School’s mission and statements of philosophy inspire and guide our teaching. The Environmental Strategic Planning process celebrates our mission statement including the charge to “educate ethically and environmentally minded scholars, citizens, and leaders for our globalized society”. Inspired by our Mission and the direction from the Strategic Plan to “maximize Gunston’s unique Chesapeake Bay location,” the Environmental Strategic Planning Committee proposes the following enhancement to the language in our philosophy document:

Existing language: Connecting with the Natural Environment Gunston recognizes the interrelatedness of all species and the vital role that every human being plays as part of the biosphere. We therefore inculcate in all members of the school an attitude of environmental responsibility. The school embraces sustainable practices and promotes student involvement in environmental protection both on campus and in the larger community. Gunston is committed to using its waterfront location to integrate the Chesapeake Bay watershed into the curriculum, thereby emphasizing the importance of protecting our natural resources, as well as celebrating the aesthetic beauty and ecological complexity of our region.

Proposed language: Educating for Sustainability Gunston acknowledges the interrelatedness of all species and the vital role that every human being plays as part of the biosphere. Moreover, because the school believes that environmental stress is a central challenge facing humanity, we seek to inspire in all members of our school community a commitment to environmental responsibility by placing three tenets of “sustainability”-‐-‐ecological integrity, social justice, and economic vitality-‐-‐at the center of our institutional and curricular efforts. Through classwork and co-‐curricular programming, an ongoing pursuit of sustainable practices, intensive and rigorous environment-‐based educational experiences for all students across all disciplines, and diverse environmental stewardship opportunities for students, we fulfill our mission of educating environmentally-‐minded scholars, citizens, and leaders.

1.1.1 What are “Educating for Sustainability” and “Environment-‐Based Education”? To become a “regional and national leader” in environmental teaching and learning, Gunston as an institution must further embrace an environment-‐integrating pedagogical philosophy. As the field of environmental education has evolved, two curricular and pedagogical approaches have emerged as leading philosophies: ● Educating for Sustainability (EfS) and ● Environment-‐based Education (EBE). EDUCATING FOR SUSTAINABILITY Both of these philosophies align with Gunston’s rigorous and student-‐centered educational approach. The Educating for Sustainability (EfS) approach, which evolved from the field of environmental education and articulated originally by the innovative systems thinker Peter Senge and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, unifies the themes of global awareness and environmental stewardship in Gunston’s mission statement1. EfS asks institutions and educators to consider a comprehensive, values-centered curriculum philosophy that addresses three key issues 1) social equity, 2) economic vitality, and 3) environmental responsibility. Education for sustainability is a lifelong learning process that leads to an informed and involved citizenry having the creative problem-solving skills, scientific and social literacy, and commitment to engage in responsible individual and cooperative actions. These actions will help ensure an environmentally sound and economically prosperous future. -‐-‐President’s Council on Sustainable Development, “Education for Sustainable Development” The Cloud Institute, a leader in designing and evaluating EfS curricula and materials, outlines nine core content standard areas of EfS. 1. Cultural Preservation & Transformation 1 The Cloud Institute, Sustainable Schools LLC

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Responsible Local & Global Citizenship The Dynamics of Systems & Change Sustainable Economics Healthy Commons Natural Laws & Ecological Principles Inventing & Affecting The Future Multiple Perspectives Strong Sense Of Place

EDUCATING FOR SUSTAINABILITY: A VISUAL FRAMEWORK

http://www.uwlax.edu/uploadedImages/Initiatives/Sustainability1/VEN%20DIAGRAM.5.jpg

ENVIRONMENT-BASED EDUCATION Meanwhile, The Environment-Based Education (EBE) approach is the pedagogical foundation for our Bay Studies Program and is utilized frequently in Gunston’s classes. The key to EBE, as articulated in Gerald Lieberman’s foundational text Education and Environment (2013), is using the natural environment as an integrating context for inquiry-based learning. The extensive research EBE’s impact on student learning is powerful. Not only does it lead to high levels of student comprehension and engagement, but it also has important and significant effects on students' thinking skills including: ● Increased ability to think creatively; ● Greater proficiency in solving problems and thinking strategically; and, ● Better application of systems thinking2. Furthermore, EBE has significant impact on non-‐traditional learners as students' natural interest in the environment motivates them to learn and understand the complexities of their world3. Environment-‐based education is well supported by educational research to improve student comprehension and engagement as students develop the ability to make connections and transfer their knowledge from familiar to unfamiliar context2. Benefits of the EBE approach include: ● Multisensory engagement ● A process-‐focus ● Trust building ● The ignition of inquiry ● The cultivation of leadership ● The fostering of non-‐verbal learning skills ● Health Benefits ● Differentiation4

2 Lieberman, Gerald A. and Hoody, Linda. Closing the Achievement Gap: Using the Environment as an

Integrating Context for Learning. (1998). San Diego, CA. 3 National Environmental Education Training Foundation. Environment-‐based Education: Creating High Performance Schools and Students. (2000). Washington, DC. 4 Excerpted from CBF Principals Retreat, July 2014

By further embracing and adopting the EfS philosophy and EBE pedagogies within all courses across all grades, we move the issues of sustainability more into the to the center of Gunston’s teaching and learning experience.

1.1.2 “The New Content”: The Academic Fundamentals of Educating for Sustainability Without question, Gunston students are living an era of social, economic, and environmental stress. As the next generation of stewards and leaders, we believe it is essential for students to understand and engage with a series of core issues that will prepare them for life beyond Gunston. As a college-‐preparatory institution, Gunston continues to believe in the importance of students mastering the fundamentals of English, Mathematics, Natural Science, Foreign Language, the Humanities, and the Arts. However, as we seek to prepare students for life beyond Gunston, it is crucial that they do not experience academic disciplines in isolation; rather, their academic work needs to be embedded into a highly- coordinated and engaging learning context that prepares them effectively for the society and planet they are going to inhabit. With this in mind, both within and across academic disciplines, it is crucial for the Gunston curriculum to incorporate the following core knowledge areas-‐-‐the importance of which reflect a growing consensus among scholars, educators, businesses, government, religious leaders, and international organizations-‐-‐related to environment, society, and economy: ● Population Trends/Growth ● Air Quality/Pollution ● Energy Production and Consumption ● Global Climate ● Biodiversity ● Water Quality and Supply ● Ocean Biochemistry ● Natural Resources Consumption ● Global Health ● Patterns of Economic and Social Development ● Social Justice ● The Impact of Technology By purposefully integrating these issues within the curriculum, we seek to educate our students to manage important future challenges.

1.1.2a Anthropocene: a key term One of the major goals of the Environmental Strategic Plan is to integrate important conceptual terms into Gunston’s daily dialogue. One term, anthropocene, deserves special discussion. The short definition of anthropocene is this: we are now living in an era where the human imprint on the environment is having a profound effect on the ecological sustainability of our planet. In her 2015 Pulitzer Prize-‐winning work, The Sixth Extinction, author Elizabeth Kolbert uses this term extensively, and we believe it is essential for our community to embrace the term’s core conceptual reality. Here is a slightly more technical explanation of the term: The 'Anthropocene' is a term widely used since its coining by Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stoermer in 2000 to denote the present time interval, in which many geologically significant conditions and processes are profoundly altered by human activities. These include changes in: erosion and sediment transport associated with a variety of anthropogenic processes, including colonisation, agriculture, urbanisation and global warming; the chemical composition of the atmosphere, oceans and soils, with significant anthropogenic perturbations of the cycles of elements such as carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and various metals; environmental conditions generated by these perturbations; these include global warming, ocean acidification and spreading oceanic 'dead zones'; the biosphere both on land and in the sea, as a result of habitat loss, predation, species invasions and the physical and chemical changes noted above.5 Formally, the term derives from a commission of the International Union of Geological Sciences, whose expected forthcoming recommendations: will most likely “formally bring an end to the only epoch that any of us have ever known—the Holocene, which began after the last ice age, about twelve thousand years ago, and lasts to this day. The group’s members are pondering whether the human imprint on this planet is large and clear enough to warrant the christening of a new epoch, one named for us: the Anthropocene.6 5 http://quaternary.stratigraphy.org/workinggroups/anthropocene/

6 http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/holocene-‐anthropocene-‐human-‐epoch

1.1.3 Essential Questions to Guide Our Teaching and Learning Gunston’s faculty and administrative team have commenced the process to further EfS and EBE integration. Throughout 2015, we have explored these philosophies, reflected upon their core elements, and created connections with our existing academic program. As a foundation, Gunston has crafted a series of essential questions. These guiding or “essential” questions are a key component of the “backwards design” or Understanding By Design7 curriculum development process, and our questions were formulated through an extensive faculty dialogue. These overarching questions can be incorporated into a wide range of disciplines and can become the focal point of a single unit or cover an entire year.

7 Wiggins, Grant. Understanding by Design. Assn.

Expanded edition (March 15, 2005)

for Supervision & Curriculum Development; 2nd

Importantly, these essential questions aim to preserve and extend Gunston’s institutional DNA as a rigorous and nurturing college-preparatory environment. That is, these questions mirror the inherent, but previously unwritten guiding questions that we incorporate regularly within our student-‐centered teaching culture, and merge them with key questions related to sustainability. The scope of the questions progresses outward from the individual to the world at large: Level

Student-Centered Instruction

Education for Sustainability

Individual

Who am I as an individual and what does it mean to be a successful learner and human being?

Who am I in relationship to the natural, cultural, and social environment, and how do my personal beliefs and identity guide my daily actions?

Community

What does it mean to be an “ethical citizen” of a community?

What is my role in supporting an authentically “sustainable” community?

Regional/ National

What is the “American Dream”, and why is it important? Why should we celebrate the Chesapeake Bay watershed?

What are the core challenges of living during the Anthropocene, within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, as a resident in the United States, and in a globalized society?

Global

How has our global past shaped our global present? What is diversity, and what does it mean to be a “global citizen”?

What is the value of diversity in ecosystems and cultures, and how does my worldview and daily actions contribute to a culture of sustainability?

Gunston 2016 to Gunston 2020 Current, student centered guiding questions are shown at left; enhanced guiding questions are depicted below.

1.2 Gunston 2016: Our Current Curriculum and Program Since Gunston’s founding, the school’s direct access to the Corsica River has cultivated a sense of environmental awareness and appreciation in the students and faculty who live, study, and work here each day. The Gunston student experience is deeply intertwined with the waterfront, from the time they arrive to Gunston by boat their freshman year, to the time they disembark by boat as graduating seniors. Gunston’s 32-acre campus and direct access to the river provides us with a remarkably rare and powerful educational resource. It currently offers a dynamic living classroom for a range of classes. Our ongoing emphasis on environmental education motivated Gunston became a certified Maryland Green School in 2011-‐-‐one of the first independent schools to receive this designation-‐-‐and the application process spurred the faculty to further expand environmental issue instruction within the curriculum. Gunston was recertified in 2015, and our embrace of the rigorous and comprehensive Green School certification process ensures that themes of environmental education are woven throughout the curricula of every discipline. Our student body embraces the school’s emphasis on environmental stewardship, and we enjoy remarkably strong student engagement and leadership in this regard. The school's Environmental Club-‐-‐traditionally the school’s largest student club-‐-‐takes an active leadership role in Gunston’s many sustainability practices. The club oversees our recycling program, led the change to compostable plates and reusable silverware in the cafeteria, and has recommended many habitat restoration projects to improve the campus. The club also plans Gunston’s comprehensive annual Earth Day Celebration. Meanwhile, the school’s renowned Bay Studies Program enters its third decade with renewed focus and vision. The weeklong program of off-‐campus seminars, based on developing a meaningful understanding of the role the Bay plays in shaping our history, culture, industry, and future, aligns with environmental education best practices. Every Gunston student participates in Bay Studies each year they are enrolled at Gunston, and many note it as the highlight of their Gunston experience. Bay Studies continues to provide transformational experiences and cultivate a sense of place for all students. 20

A significant revision to the Bay Studies curriculum, implemented in 2015, creates a progression of learning experiences and utilizes the Bay as a case study for understanding both local and global environmental challenges. 9th graders begin with courses designed to introduce them to the Bay through direct experiences on the water. The progressive curriculum builds on student knowledge and offers new experiences each year. Juniors and seniors participate in advanced seminars. A new comparative watershed trip has been added to the Bay Studies curriculum. Initially, students have explored the analogies between the Chesapeake Bay and the Amazon River, and future years will offer experiences in new destinations. Additional enhancements to the program include awarding credit for participating in Bay Studies. The credit formally recognizes the over 40 instructional hours in a typical Bay Studies course. Moving forward, all students will complete a project or portfolio, further aligning Bay Studies with best practices in environmental education as outlined by the North American Association of Environmental Educators. Global and environmental aspects of Gunston’s mission blend during trips beyond the Chesapeake Bay watershed where students study analogous systems and share their knowledge. The evolving curriculum offers exciting potential for increasing local and global partnerships that strengthen environmental teaching and learning here at Gunston. New program areas include expanding STEM opportunities, assisting in professional research with leading institutions, and new expeditions.

1.2.1 Areas of Opportunity within our Curriculum and Internal Program With such a strong foundation, opportunities abound in our program to further embrace Educating for Sustainability (EfS) and utilize a diversity of Environment-‐ Based Education (EBE) teaching strategies to facilitate our teaching and learning. Through an ongoing embrace of EfS as an educational philosophy and from it, the guiding questions and curriculum we have identified, we have the opportunity to reflect on all aspects of our program and enrich our students’ experiences. Responding to the charge set by the school’s multi-‐stakeholder Strategic Planning Committee to make Gunston “a regional and national leader in environmental teaching and learning,” our faculty, staff, administration, and board have commenced the process of engaging in deep, serious, comprehensive discussion of how to achieve this goal. Throughout the fall of 2015, significant progress has been made. The department chairs and the full faculty have been introduced to EfS as a philosophy and were involved in crafting guiding essential questions. We have started reviewing our curriculum maps to identify existing work that helps our students address the guiding questions. Work will continue during the spring of 2016 to scaffold these questions by departments. Below are some of the areas where: 1) we are currently aligning our practices with our mission statement and the emphasis of the Environmental Strategic Plan and 2) are areas of opportunity both within and beyond our program to explore and consider enhancing: Day-to-Day Instruction: For students, day-‐to-‐day classroom instruction offers the best platform for exploring “The New Content”. Of course, for the greatest impact and benefit of our students, it is essential for sustainability issues to be integrated across the curriculum, not simply siloed in the sciences or during Bay Studies. In departments and as a full faculty, we can continue to explore how guiding questions/issues are addressed in our classes and work towards an intentionally scaffolded program. This should include the creation of a yearlong research and writing project, similar to highly effective Junior Symposium and Senior Paradigm Project.

Recommendations: ● Use an intentional curriculum planning process to further embed sustainability issues and guiding questions into coursework ● Utilize EBE, inquiry-‐based, and project-‐based strategies and other researched-‐based teaching approaches to convey material ● Explore potential cross-‐curricular sustainability collaborations within grade-‐level working groups. Learning environment Environment-‐based learning and environmental education best practices encourage us to explore the learning environment to engage our students, ignite their curiosity, connect them with the wonders of the natural world, and teach in a constructivist manner. Therefore, as we embrace Educating for Sustainability and its associated emphasis on flexibility and the outdoors, it is essential for Gunston to consider the ways that our learning spaces reflect these values. Indeed, schools are rapidly seeking to de-‐industrialize classroom layouts, and Gunston has recently developed a number of more flexible learning spaces across campus. Recommendations: ● Improve and expand the infrastructure of outdoor learning spaces ● Continue to feature student and place-‐based artwork ● Continue to enhance how our windows, lighting and ventilation connect us to the world outside Environmental Capstone Project Beyond the structure of our classes, Gunston offers many independent learning opportunities for students. Gunston has a strong tradition of offering academically-‐ rigorous, yearlong research and writing projects (Senior Paradigm, Junior Symposium, Sophomore Poetry project). Based on the goals of this strategic plan, the development of an EfS project seems to be well-‐aligned with this tradition. Recommendations include: Recommendation: ● Develop a yearlong research/writing project embedded into the curriculum 23

Independent Learning/Co-Curricular Engagement Many opportunities exist for students to apply their knowledge and engage in authentic learning experiences. Students could participate in the Maryland Envirothon academic competition, the Baltimore Ecosystem Study’s Data Jam multidisciplinary competition, or creating an internal green design challenge to address a different topic each year. Recommendations: ● Participate in the Maryland Envirothon ● Participate in the Baltimore Ecosystem Study Data Jam ● Create Gunston’s Green Design Challenge ● Convene a World Series of Birding team ● Connect with outside providers ● Expand citizen science and collaborative projects Bay Studies The Bay Studies program continues to grow and evolve. Consistent with the desire to strengthen the emphasis of this unique and innovative program, and support our belief that Bay Studies models excellent environment-‐based learning, we recommend: Recommendations: ● Award credit, to be listed on transcripts for ¼ credit annually ● Design a rubric to assess engagement ● Require portfolios or other demonstrations of learning

Recruitment, Orientation, and Open Houses Gunston welcomes new members to the community in successive waves during August. By designing orientation events to model environment-‐based learning, we and introduce them to the tenets of EfS. Enhancing sustainability education within our orientation programs highlights this unique aspect of the Gunston program for prospective families. Recommendations include: Recommendations: ● Evaluate teaching and administrative candidates in light of their experience/commitment to the theme of sustainability ● Revise existing orientation programs: ○ New Faculty ○ International Students ○ Freshman ○ New Students ● Adding a sustainability or place-‐based element to Open Houses Food Service “You are what you eat” may seem like a trite phrase but the foods we choose to purchase and consume on a daily basis have a real and direct impact on the environment. Many Gunston students come from families of farmers and watermen; many are active hunters and fishers. Each day, every member of the community must drive past fields of soy and corn in the summer and spreads of decoys in the winter to reach Gunston’s waterfront campus. Therefore, the visible links between agriculture, land use, environmental integrity, and economic vitality are more tangible for Gunston students than for those students enrolled in a non-rural school. Without question, our campus food offerings present a powerful learning opportunity, and offer Gunston significant potential returns on improved sustainability. Of course, the school’s food costs are substantial, and food is fraught with emotional, psychological, ethical, moral, and environmental issues. So what do we eat and why? Seeking to engage with this question will span our curriculum, facilities and operations, and reach our community partners. It will engage our students, members of the Environmental Sustainability Committee, and vendors. These are not new questions we are raising, indeed the Gunston community has been discussing food for several years. Examples include: 25

● Michael Pollan’s Omnivore's Dilemma was chosen as the community summer reading book in 2013 ● Earth Day 2014 featured a meat-‐free menu ● Earth Day 2015 was themed “The Intersection of Land, Livestock, and Wildlife” and offered a locally sourced lunch Addressing the question “what do we eat and why” is a key step in improving Gunston’s sustainability and further sets us on the path towards national recognition for our efforts. Recommendation: ● Review the school’s food delivery system in light of our sustainability goals. Proposal: Educating for Sustainability Curriculum Working Group The Environmental Strategic Planning Committee formally recommends that the school convene a Educating for Sustainability curriculum working group. The role of the group will be to review the areas of opportunity, set benchmarks and tangible goals, and support the shift towards EfS.

1.2.2 Pathways for Student Engagement Gunston offers students many opportunities to engage in educating for sustainability. Many of Gunston’s clubs connect to the tenets of sustainability. Working with the student leadership of the Environmental Club, Gunston Initiates Volunteer Efforts, National Honor Society, and Student Diversity Leaders Group, we can expand beyond the opportunities described below. Environment The Environmental Club is traditionally one of Gunston’s largest clubs. Students are involved in environmental sustainability efforts on our campus, including but not limited to: recycling and composting, tending the gardens, and monitoring oyster spat. Off campus and in association with partner organizations students are involved in: water quality monitoring, monarch butterfly monitoring, attending the World Series of Birding, assisting with Saw-‐whet Owl banding, horseshoe crab monitoring, and participating in Project Clean Stream. The Environmental Club plans and hosts Gunston’s annual Earth Day. The day has traditionally had a strong focus connecting with and understanding the natural world. The club’s leadership can explore how to incorporate issues of equity and economy into future events. Equity Three clubs at Gunston focus on aspects of social equity through activism and volunteering. GIVE (Gunston Initiates Volunteer Efforts) coordinates volunteer efforts and fundraising initiatives for the students. The club chooses three charities to support annual and offers a diversity of volunteer projects for club members and students at large. The National Honor Society members participate in one coordinated volunteer effort annually as part of their membership requirement. We can work with the leadership of these clubs to explore the connections of their efforts to Gunston’s philosophy of EfS. 27

Student Diversity Leaders Group (SDLG) is focused on exploring Gunston’s cultural and social diversity. The club has been active in planning assemblies to raise awareness in all students about various diversity issues in today’s society (gender equality, social justice, sexual identity). In addition, SDLG helps to plan Gunston’s Global Awareness Day. Global Awareness Day offers rich opportunities to explore the intersection of Equity and Economy in the three E’s of sustainability.

1.2.3 Proposal: Educating for Sustainability Service Requirement Currently, Gunston’s community service graduation requirement is 50 hours, and our philosophy notes that “we instill in all members of the community a sense of civic responsibility and an awareness of our role as stewards of the school, the natural environment, and the community beyond the school. Our school's commitment to service reflects an expansive concept of community that includes individuals and organizations in local, state, regional, national, and international areas.” Most of the students exceed this requirement. As we consider the ways we utilize service as a pathway for learning, we recommend that our current service requirement be reviewed in light of the tenets of sustainability. Perhaps the requirement could be expanded, consider both on and off campus service, and seek to incorporate categories of service that include 1) social justice, 2) environmental health, and 3) economic vitality. A comprehensive review of the requirement will craft a policy that speaks to our mission and supports students growth and development.

1.3 Professional Development Embracing the philosophy of educating for sustainability (EfS) and enhancing our teaching strategies with environment-‐based education (EBE) enriches our classrooms and benefits our students. EfS and EBE are clear pedagogical “labels” that help to define and support the ongoing integration of Gunston’s global and environmental vision into the academic program that has been evolving since the revision of our mission, as well as our initial Green School Certification, both in 2011. Early adopters added units to their curricula that focused on environmental issue instruction. As we broaden our scope from “environmental” issues to a broader notion of “sustainability instruction”, we expand our current degree of integration to 70% of our classes. Professional development is essential for us to move educating for sustainability to the core of our teaching. Thus, professional development in support of achieving our academic goals will include time for faculty, departmental and administrative retreats, workshops hosted by other organizations, and hosting workshops at Gunston. Opportunities shall include: Faculty Retreats Under the school’s leadership, we have already dedicated meaningful time in opening and closing faculty meetings to environmental instruction and Gunston’s Green School certification. The full faculty worked together to draft the “essential questions” our students should be grappling with throughout their time at Gunston. Essential questions are overarching and open-‐ended questions that promote inquiry while building on prior knowledge. We have begun the process of scaffolding these essential questions within the learning experience. Future retreats will ensure continued progress. Professional Development Workshops There are a wealth of professional development opportunities to support our EfS philosophy and EBE pedagogy across a multitude of disciplines. Programs are local, national and international; one to five days in length; and range in price from free to two thousand dollars. To support and enrich our practice, all faculty should be challenged to 29

participate in one professional development opportunity of their choosing every two years to three years.

1.3.1 Proposed: EfS Professional Development Fund Gunston seeks to establish a fund to support professional development to further Gunston’s goals of becoming a local and national leader in environmental education and supporting further utilization of our waterfront campus. The Sustainability professional development grants would be awarded to faculty annually who identify opportunities to expand their knowledge and comfort with using the environment and/or sustainability as an integrating context for learning. Hosting Workshops The Gunston School has formed a strategic partnership with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), AIMS, VAIS, and AISGW to increase professional development for independent schools. CBF and Gunston will present a one-‐day workshop on implementing student action plans in the spring of 2016. In addition, Gunston and CBF are developing summer institutes for independent school leaders and teachers that will feature Gunston’s signature Bay Studies program as a model for environment-‐based education. More about this dynamic partnership is included in the Community section of the proposed plan.

1.4 Five year plan to develop an environment-‐based, educating for sustainability program for The Gunston School Target Area/ Activity

Timeline

Evaluation

Responsible Party

Educational Philosophy

●

Adopt proposed Educating for Sustainability philosophy statement Developing EfS and EBE

Spring 2016

Spring of 2016-‐ 2018

Bay Studies Credit Offered

Spring 2016

Learning environment

Spring 2017-‐

EfS Working Group

Document Review

Scaffolding of EfS into the curriculum. Academic Faculty

All classes in all disciplines support student engagement with Efs

Transcripts, web and print materials

Structures for outdoor learning improved

Spring 2016

Members are nominated/appointed

Fall 2016 -‐ 2018

Working group evaluates and offers recommendations

EfS Service Requirement

Professional Development Fund

Fall 2016

Working group reports on successes quarterly

Bay Studies Program Director, Registrar, Directors of Communication and Admissions

Sustainability Coordinator, Facilities Staff

Academic Faculty

Service requirement adjusted for Class Assistant Head of of 2020 School, Registrar

Spring 2016

Budget Review

2016-‐2018

Gunston co-‐sponsors and host workshops with CBF.

2016-‐2018

Board of Trustees

Head of School, Board of Trustees

Head of School, Sustainability Coordinator

30% of faculty participate in EfS PD annually

Teaching Faculty, Administrators

Section 2: Gunston’s Facilities and Operations

2.1 Mission Statement and Action Area Summary Our goal is to achieve a sustainable campus through intentional decision making that results in a low-‐impact built environment, creates teaching tools that increase awareness, and preserves the ecological integrity of our campus. The Gunston School’s buildings and grounds are the backbone of our Environmental Strategic Plan, and allows us a unique educational opportunity to make the concepts of sustainability visible. Our thirty-‐two acres and four core buildings are unique institutional assets and shape our teaching and learning. Our efforts to improve their environmental sustainability allow us to better fulfill

Gunston’s mission. The first things that come to mind when the term sustainability is mentioned are changes to infrastructure at an institutional level and individual actions and behaviors. Gunston has made significant infrastructure updates in the past three years. Renovations to the Long Academic Building and Everdell Hall have improved with energy and water efficiency while improving the learning environment. The Ryan Library and Shoemaker Idea Box, located in Everdell Hall, feature extensive high R-‐value windows that offer sweeping views of the campus and help to blend the built and natural worlds. These major upgrades allow us to turn the school’s focus towards enhancing and accentuating the outdoor, rather than indoor, spaces. 32

The Facilities and Operations working group proposes four, high impact areas that we should focus our efforts on. They are ranked based on the degree of need, environmental impact, and visible benefits. 1. Grounds and Landscaping 2. Signage and Monitoring 3. Energy Consumption 4. Waste Stream and Purchasing The actions required in each of these areas are discussed in detail in this proposal.

2.2 Proposal: Guiding Principles for Decision Makers The Facilities and Operations working group of the Environmental Strategic Plan propose the following guiding principles to improve the sustainability of The Gunston School. These guidelines can be applied to the Action Areas described in detail in this proposal and to smaller, day-‐to-‐day tasks in our operations. The guidelines are proposed with the understanding that every decision will require considering the environmental costs, community benefits, and financial sustainability of the action. General Principles: ● Choose approaches that are accessible and relevant to the community and serve as learning opportunities. ● Choose projects that have the greatest visual impact for all members of the community and guests to the campus. ● Choose unique approaches that model The Gunston School’s role as a leader in environmental teaching and learning. ● Consider how ongoing accountability and evaluation can be incorporated and impacts qualitatively or quantitatively measured. ● Fiscal sustainability must be maintained. ● Environmental cost/benefit analysis should be completed. These guiding principles will be passed on the all employees of the school and help to guide day-‐to-‐day purchases. They can also be a tool by which the Board of Trustees evaluates the capital projects identified in the Action Areas. All capital projects should require additional “sustainability” approval of the relevant Board committee after budgets and estimates have been gathered.

Grounds and Landscape ● Plant native species ● Increase wildlife habitat on the campus ● Expand our riparian buffer ● Minimize the use of chemicals and carbon dioxide in maintenance ● Create inviting spaces that encourage the enjoyment of our campus Signage and Monitoring ● Signage and facilities should encourage and support environmental behaviors ● Language and visuals should be presented in clear, layman’s terms ● Highlight efforts that are not easy to visualize or impacts that are not readily apparent ● Utilize our existing technology and infrastructure wherever possible. Energy Consumption ● Increase campus energy efficiency in order to reduce the use of energy sources that cause climate change, air pollution, or degradation of the natural environment. ● Implement technologies and/or processes that are visible to the community and encourage additional uptake. ● Utilize renewable energy sources when practical. ● Shift usage of high-‐impact energy sources to lower-‐impact energy sources when practical. ● Complete an economic analysis of alternate energy source options in order to guide the selection process. Waste Stream and Purchasing ● Reusable and durable goods should be favored over consumables ● Consumable Products must be sustainable, environmentally sensitive, and improve the health of the school. ● Evaluate vendor contracts to support choosing environmentally sensitive options ● Conduct a cost/benefit analysis with an eye towards fiscal and environmental sustainability

2.3 Proposal: Sustainability Audit Sustainability audits are a tool that schools and businesses can utilize to establish a baseline from which to conduct their sustainability work. Each organization must first choose the scope of the audit; sustainability, environmental sustainability, energy audit, or carbon audit are common areas to focus on. The Environmental Strategic Planning committee recommends that we choose an environmental sustainability audit. An environmental audit will look at all aspects of our impact on the environment as well as all of our actions to protect the natural world including our teaching.

http://greengurus.com.au/

There are many auditing tools available and tailored towards K-‐12 schools. We can select a set of self-‐study questions and report our findings ourselves or we can utilize a consultant to help guide us through the process. The internal or self-‐study audit, is time-‐intensive but cost effective. The external audit, guided by an auditor, is less time-‐intensive but more capital intensive. The external audit also confers third-‐party recognition of our sustainability efforts. Either auditing model will position the school well to continue to seek recognition and certification for our sustainability efforts. We can work towards national recognition through applying for the prestigious Department of Education’s Green Ribbon Schools program.

The facility working group recommends that we pursue an external audit. The environmental sustainability audit should be launched as soon as possible. It will offer the Board of Trustees and the school community a benchmark from which to build. The audit will offer us a metric to demonstrate progress and the opportunity to celebrate our steps along the way. Having this empirical data is important as we seek to raise the profile of Gunston as a leader in environment-‐based education and sustainability.

2.4 Proposal: Landscape The Gunston School is situated on the banks of the Corsica River. Only a small cadre of schools have the privilege and responsibility of being located on waterfront property. Edged in agricultural lands and the tidal tributary of the Chesapeake Bay, the campus serves as an extension of the classroom and is a unique, institutional asset. As such, and in light of Gunston’s commitment to environmental sustainability, we recommend the Board adopt the following guiding principles and address these sensitive parts of the campus. Guiding principles: ● Plant native species ● Increase wildlife habitat on the campus ● Expand our riparian buffer ● Minimize the use of chemicals and carbon dioxide in maintenance ● Create inviting spaces that encourage the enjoyment of our campus Located in the critical area, our activities have direct impact on the watershed. Addressing areas of runoff and erosion are of vital importance. This focus is supported by the funding currently available through the stormwater management fee. The Environmental Strategic Planning Committee will be actively seeking funding to support these efforts through public and private funds. Best management practices (BMPs) include the installation of rain gardens, bioretention and sediment ponds.

2.4.1 Proposal: Issues and Opportunities on Gunston’s campus Issue

Opportunity

Erosion -‐ (land area being lost to the river, sediment moving downstream)

● Utilize a landscape architect to redesign the slope accessing the waterfront; currently an environmental, esthetic, and safety issue ● Stabilize the hillside beside the gym, making access less hazardous for maintenance vehicles.

Unmitigated surface water runoff from impervious surfaces

● Create a stepped sediment pond by the bridge and quad ● Install a rain garden between Everdell parking area culvert and the ravine/sediment pond ● Install small rain gardens at each downspout

Current plantings are overgrown and filled with non-‐natives

● Remove the existing butterfly garden and plant appropriate species elsewhere ● Extirpate kudzu, english ivy, myrtle etc around the buildings ● Replant with natives whenever and wherever possible

Mowed open space does not support wildlife.

● Create a Monarch Garden by tennis center ● Plant a fruiting shrub garden by the raised vegetable garden ● Plant a warm season meadow by Everdell parking lot

Sustainable landscaping

● ● ● ●

Low maintenance, Low water needs No fertilizers etc required Hardscaping may be required in high traffic areas

Erosion Access to the waterfront is vital to Gunston’s curriculum and athletics. The crew team and sailing team each host regattas in the fall and spring that bring numerous visitors to Gunston. In the summer, the waterfront is used by a number of program partners for various recreation activities. The staircase and vegetated ramp to the waterfront is in critical need of restoration. This should be done as part of a second living shoreline restoration that provides durable surfaces for recreational access and increases the number of plantings. The photo below, November 2015, shows the erosion that persists following the 2011 Living Shoreline restoration.

There are many stakeholders in the waterfront restoration project. Working with a landscape architect will help Gunston conceptualize the possibilities that exist at the site and allow us to maximize our financial support. Potential solutions are depicted below.

Stormwater Management The realm of stormwater management offers much opportunity for Gunston to make dramatic improvements and help Queen Anne’s County achieve its Watershed Implementation Plans requirements. The drainage from the main parking area should be directed towards a sediment pond and wetland located under the footbridge. The area is shown on the left in the photos below, a sample bioretention bonds is shown on the right.

Rain gardens and bioretention areas can be shaped in areas with flatter topography. The run off from the overflow parking on the north side of Everdell Hall should be directed into a shade garden/rain garden structure. This would slow the flow of water towards the Corsica River and allow for nutrients and sediment to settle out. A sample structure is shown in the image below.

Closer to all buildings and located at each downspout should be either a rain barrel to capture stormwater for future use or a smaller set of plantings intended to slow the flow of water over the grassy surface and increase percolation. The sketch below shows the typical plantings and necessary drainage. Invasive Species Mitigation and Wildlife Restoration Gunston’s campus provides outdoor learning opportunities in many forms. Classes of all manner gather in the shade of the Gazebo or on the rustic stumps behind the Long Academic Building. Additional structures for learning, such as benches placed in a memorial grove of trees would be a welcome addition. Science classes utilize the existing of habitats on our campus for research and wildlife observation. Expanding these habitats to include a pollinator planting, a meadow filled with species that attract pollinators, fruiting shrubs along the forest edges, a freshwater wetland, and rain gardens would enhance the curriculum. Kudzu, an invasive species, has taken over the sediment pond and drainage behind the Long Academic Building as seen this photograph.

Gunston Campus Map Green: Priority Restoration Areas of Campus Purple: Ornamental Gardens (not pictured are gardens at N. Hibernia Rd and Corsica Neck Rd), Yellow: Potential wildlife habitats (pollinator gardens, meadows, bioswales) Red: Existing vegetable gardens

2.4.2 Pathways for Student Engagement Gunston students can be involved in many of the proposed campus restoration efforts through classes, clubs, and the afternoon athletic period. Students enrolled in Biology and Ecology of the Bay are currently engaged in projects on the campus. Biology students are monitoring the living shoreline restoration along the Corsica River and can be involved in any additional waterfront restoration projects. Ecology of the Bay students research and develop habitat improvement project proposals as the classes capstone project. These proposals form the basis for many of the restoration efforts discussed above. Gunston’s annual Earth Day celebration mobilizes the whole community for a day of service to the natural environment. We can tap into this energy and accomplish significant plantings and invasive species removal projects. These projects are most successful when the space has been prepared in advance, sufficient tools and supplies are on hand, and knowledgeable experts are available to guide the work. Gunston has seven ornamental flowerbeds (Corsica Neck Rd, N. Hibernia Rd, Entrance, Gym, Long AB, Middleton, Butterfly Garden), two raised vegetable beds, and several areas that exist in a semi-‐wild state (ravine between AB and Everdell, sediment basin between AB and the gym). Maintaining these spaces exceed the manpower that Gunston currently employees. Students could be involved in maintaining these spaces through a sustainable landscaping program, either a class, an afternoon “sport”, or club, or environmental service graduation requirement. Working under the direction of an experienced landscaper, students can help maintain these spaces and expand the diversity of plantings and wildlife habitats we can maintain on the campus.

2.4.3 Summary of Critical Area Restrictions and Opportunities “Maryland’s Critical Area Program addresses land use and resource management within a strip of land, 1,000 feet wide, adjacent to all tidal waters and tidal wetlands. The Buffer is a minimum width of 100 feet and is the area immediately adjacent to these waters and wetlands.” The Green Book for the Buffer8

The Gunston School has extensive water frontage along the Corsica River. The sinuous nature of our shoreline causes our nearly our entire campus to hold the critical area designation. We have a healthy forested buffer throughout the 100 foot buffer area. The regulations and land use in these two areas is significantly different. 100-Foot Buffer Area When viewed from the land toward the water, the Buffer is the last 100 feet of the Critical Area and thus represents the last opportunity to minimize the adverse effects of human activities on the Chesapeake and Coastal Bays. The Buffer’s physical barrier between development and the water or wetlands provides the last chance for infiltration of runoff or settling out of sediments. It also provides a physical separation 8 Adkins Arboretum and the Critical Area Commission for the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays. 2012 46

between the built environment and the natural one. This physical buffering effect minimizes disruption to the habitat and behavior of many important species. The Buffer softens the impact of development within the watershed. The physical barrier alone, especially when forested, makes a notable difference in how many species inhabit an area. Gunston works to maintain a healthy forested Buffer by manually controlling invasive species and monitoring tree health. Access to the waterfront was expanded during the Living Shoreline restoration work in 2012-‐2013. Revegetating this space is critical to being in compliance with Critical Area regulations. General characteristics of Buffers are: ● The buffer must be forested, if not forested initially, reforestation is required. Actions that affect the trees in the buffer require remediation, often at a ratio of 1 affected tree to 3 new trees. ● Development (heavily restricted) within the buffer requires a variance permit and remediation in the form of planting trees, shrubs, and or herbaceous cover is required. ● Management plans are required for all activities within the buffer. Trees can be removed if they are a danger to persons or property due to death or disease. Replanting is required. Minor Buffer Management Plans are required if less than 5,000 feet will be affected, Major Buffer Management Plans are required when more than 5,000 feet are affected. ● “If a tree is diseased, dying, invasive, or considered a hazardous tree (likely to fall and cause damage or injury), a property owner can remove the tree by obtaining approval of a Simplified Buffer Management Plan. Each tree removed must be replaced with a ¾-‐inch caliper nursery stock tree. If the tree removal involves more than five trees, a local government may require a site visit, additional documentation, or a Minor Buffer Management Plan at its discretion. The removal of dead trees does not require replacement, but the area should be stabilized with native vegetation.” Gunston’s activities within the Buffer are water-‐dependent and include recreation and research. The sailing and crew teams access the water for two seasons annually. Students participate in research projects through multiple science classes. These activities may position Gunston to further stabilize the shoreline to increase safe access.

● “Maryland’s Critical Area Program encourages public access to the water, and the State and local governments work closely together to locate, design, and construct these facilities in an environmentally sensitive manner. ● “There are a limited number of circumstances where the Critical Area Program allows some disturbance within the Buffer. The most common are water dependent structures or activities. These structures and activities, such as a boat ramp or a stormwater outfall, must be located within the Buffer because of their function. Access paths to the water (perpendicular to the shoreline or the shortest distance possible) are also allowed, although any associated clearing must be the minimum necessary.” Piers and rafts are also regulated by Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Maryland’s Department of the Environment (MDE). Modifications to structures at the waterfront (over water) require permitting from DNR and MDE. Changes to the access point would require permitting from the Critical Area Commission (CAC). 1000-Foot Critical Area The campus of The Gunston School falls within the Critical Area. More specifically, it is designated a Resource Conservation Area. This designation sets the amount of build space our campus can contain. ● “Lot coverage is generally limited to 15 percent of the site and includes the area of all structures, accessory structures, parking areas, driveways, walkways, and roadways. Areas covered with gravel, stone, shell, impermeable decking, pavers, permeable pavement, or any man-‐made material are also part of lot coverage calculations. There are specific exceptions for walkways and stairways through the Buffer that provide access to a pier and for decks with gaps to allow water to pass freely.”

The Gunston’s School campus showing the approximate location of the 100 foot buffer and

1,000 foot critical area zone.

The entirety of Gunston’s thirty acre campus is treated as if it is within the Critical Area and designated a Resource Conservation Area. The CAC’s decision to lump Gunston’s original parcels into one continuous tract increases the area of impervious surfaces we can have on campus. Gunston has an additional 2 acres that can be converted to impervious surfaces while staying within our 15% site restriction. As the school continues to grow and enhance its facilities, the building limits of the RCA will pose restrictions. A new building would utilize our remaining built space allowance and displace an athletic field. Our location also offers us great opportunity. Our neighbor, a descendant of the founder of The Gunston School, is the owner of many acres of open space with deed restricted conservation easements. These parcels abut Gunston’s campus. Their deed restrictions would allow them to be utilized as athletic fields or vegetable gardens for the school. There may be other, adjacent, parcels that would benefit the school if they were either donated to us or a long-‐term lease was established to permit our access and utilization.

2.5 Proposal: Signage and Monitoring Devices ● Signage and facilities must encourage and support environmental behaviors ● Language and visuals should be presented in clear, layman’s terms ● Highlight efforts that are not easy to visualize or impacts that are not readily apparent ● Utilize our existing technology and infrastructure wherever possible. Walking around campus, hopefully everyone has noticed the new locator signage on the walls. As we look to the future, we take great care in helping Gunston take its place above and beyond its competitors. Changes or updates have strategically followed need, form, function and aesthetics. The newly placed signs give both direction and a more professional feel to the academic buildings, a simple yet polished enhancement. The Environmental Strategic Planning committee hopes to provide more signage. The purpose will be to bring awareness to, and identify the quantity of, energy and water usage. "Real time" display boards located on each academic building will allow students to actively view the amounts of water and electricity being used and saved. The result of conservative actions such as low flow toilets, on-‐ demand lighting and solar powered heating and air conditioning will be continually visible thru a monitoring device.

Another monitoring opportunity comes with the use of water bottle filling stations. These stations deliver clean, quick water bottle fills and encourage sustainability by minimizing our dependency on disposable plastic bottles. An electronic sensor allows for a touchless, sanitary use. A "Green Ticker" displays the number of 20oz. bottles saved from landfills. Custom signs displayed alongside compost/recycling/landfill stations is a way to showcase

the talents of our Art Department. Whether the artworks are of a similar nature or left to the individual artists each will identify the post usage disposal/breakdown of consumed foods and their containers all the way to the Chesapeake Bay. These signs will be an artistic, educational reminder of the vigilant practices needed to maintain healthy waterways. Signage isn't just a sophisticated feature indoors. Outdoors identification of rain gardens, sediment pond, bluebird trail, living shoreline and native plant identification further deliver our mission to being a "green" school. The location of the Gunston campus offers a great opportunity to bridge the gap between land use and nature. The key words that come to mind from the use of signage and monitoring devices are "interest" and "awareness". Both words are crucial to the environmentally conscious school that Gunston strives to be. The visual devices mentioned show the undeniably real effects of a fully functioning campus.

2.6 Proposal: Energy Solutions Guiding principles: ● Increase campus energy efficiency in order to reduce the use of energy sources that cause climate change, air pollution, or natural environment destruction. ● Implement technologies and/or processes that are visible to the community and encourage additional uptake. ● Utilize renewable energy sources when practical. ● Shift usage of high-‐impact energy sources to lower-‐impact energy sources when practical. ● Complete an economic analysis of alternate energy source options in order to guide the selection process. The Gunston School uses various energy sources in support of its operations. Energy is used in three main categories: transportation, campus facilities, and support services. When considering opportunities to reduce the environmental impact associated with the school, each of these categories presents unique opportunities and challenges. The following is a breakdown of Gunston’s current energy usage categories, in approximate order of magnitude: ● Transportation ○ Student and faculty automobiles ■ Gasoline ○ Student buses ■ Diesel fuel ● Campus facilities ○ Space heating ■ Fuel oil (Everdell/Long AB/Middleton/Faculty homes) ■ Utility electricity (Everdell/Long AB mild weather/Head’s House) ■ Liquid propane (Field house) ○ Air conditioning / ventilation ■ Utility electricity (Everdell/Long AB/Middleton/Faculty homes) ■ Solar PV (partial load in Long AB) ○ Lighting ■ Electricity (all buildings) ○ Domestic hot water ■ Liquid propane (Everdell) ■ Utility electricity (Middleton/Long AB/Field House/Faculty homes) 53

○ Fresh water pumping ■ Electricity (all buildings) ● Support services ○ Grounds maintenance ■ Diesel fuel (vehicles, mowers) ■ Gasoline (outdoor power equipment) ○ Waterfront program ■ Gasoline (boats) In prioritizing the evaluation of the above usage areas, preference should be given to the areas that exhibit the highest usage of high-impact fuels. Generally, petroleum distillates such as diesel, gasoline, and fuel oil represent the highest impact fuel. Utility electricity has a lower air quality impact, followed by liquid propane gas. In the transportation category, Gunston’s efforts can be focused on two areas: addressing direct fuel usage in its contracted bus fleet, and/or providing a framework to indirectly reduce fuel usage by community members during their travel activities to and from campus. The former can be handled by opening discussions with the school’s bus contractor regarding the feasibility of using smaller and more efficient buses when practical, and by investigating the use of alternate fuels such as biodiesel in the existing bus equipment. The latter can be addressed by providing campus incentives for community members who reduce the environmental impact associated with their transportation activity. This could include preferential parking areas for fuel-‐efficient vehicles and carpools, electric vehicle charging stations, etc. In the campus usage category, fuel oil and electricity are extensively used. Fuel oil, for wintertime space heating, is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, and contributes to local air quality reduction since the exhaust gases are released on campus. Usage reduction in this category can be achieved by shifting usage, where possible, to new or existing heat pump systems. The impact of the fuel use could be mitigated by investigating alternate fuels for use with the same heating equipment. Biodiesel and waste vegetable oil are candidates. Utility electricity is used for air conditioning, ventilation, lighting, and other conveniences. Air conditioning energy usage can be reduced through user training and careful planning of control systems. Lighting usage can be reduced by installing automatic controls and energy-‐efficient fixtures. Updating the lighting in the gym is a high priority. For a nominal capital investment we will see decreased utility bills and a more user friendly space.

Monitoring of utility electricity is important to track our efforts and progress. To appropriately measure electrical usage, each building needs its own electrical meter. The Facilities working group recommends investing in installing separate meters for Everdell and Middleton. Reducing or eliminating net utility electricity usage can be achieved through the installation of solar PV generation equipment. This equipment is available through two avenues: energy service providers and equipment installation vendors. The former avenue provides lower long-‐term savings with little to no capital expenditure. The latter provides higher long-‐term savings with a high capital cost. The school should engage an independent expert to determine which model will yield the most cost savings for the school. This is a priority action area, as both cost savings and environmental benefit can be achieved simultaneously. Water heating equipment should be analyzed to use less harmful fuels and decrease standby losses. Newer technologies such as tankless or hybrid heat pump water heaters should be considered. When multiple water wells are available, the shallowest well that can meet the demand for water should be used to minimize pumping energy. Purchase decisions for support equipment that use fossil fuels should include an environmental analysis component. For example, battery-‐powered electric outdoor power equipment should be used when practical as a replacement for harmful 2-‐stroke engines. Biodiesel can be considered for diesel-‐powered tractors and mowers. Efficient 4-‐stroke or direct-‐injection 2-‐stroke engines should be selected for waterfront support boats. Each improvement made to campus equipment and procedures should be matched by a community education/awareness campaign. For example, the decision to install solar PV equipment on campus should be advertised with signage or announcements, and an ongoing effort should be made to update the community with data on the system’s effectiveness. Behind-‐the-‐scenes improvements, such as high-‐efficiency water heaters, should be publicized so that community members are made aware of the technology and its benefits.

2.7 Proposal: Waste Stream and Purchasing The Gunston School has made a bold commitment to sustainability that affects decision making in many areas of our daily operations. We can greatly improve our environmental sustainability by conducting a thorough audit of our waste stream and altering our purchasing habits. The area of waste and purchasing is a highly visible and inclusive way to demonstrate our commitment to increased sustainability. As the classic 3 R’s (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) layout, we must tackle our waste and purchasing simultaneously. The 3 R’s have been expanded in recent years. Additions include Refuse, Repurpose, and Rethink. These six R’s can help guide our efforts. Reduce and Refuse will spur us to consider how we can reduce waste before it reaches our campus. Why do we offer single serving water bottles at events? Reuse and Repurpose will challenge students to look at the current waste items and identify new applications. Why not compost the bathroom paper towels? And finally, Recycle and Rethink will return us to the beginning through composting, recycling stations, and reevaluating how we can steer waste into these two areas. Making changes will involve working with students, faculty, and staff and require a collective effort to engage, on a daily basis, with reducing our ecological footprint. These actions can be embedded in our environment-‐based education curriculum. The following are the guiding principles for addressing our waste stream and purchasing practices: ● Reusable and durable goods should be favored over consumables ● Consumable products must be sustainable, environmentally sensitive, and improve the health of the school. ● Vendor contracts should support our efforts to choose environmentally sensitive options ● Both fiscal and environmental sustainability must be considered in cost-‐benefit analysis

Waste Stream Gunston currently has programs in place to compost food waste in the cafeteria and recycle portions of our waste. The remainder, and presumed majority of our waste, goes to the landfill. Centreville is serviced by a municipal landfill and Maryland Environmental Service for its recycling program. Our trash may be out of sight when the dumpsters leave campus, but the waste doesn’t travel far. Modern landfills have been designed to reduce the instances whereby pollutants leach from the bottom into the groundwater. These environmental protections are very important but waste still piles up in landfills as the rate of decomposition is very low once they are capped and sealed. Maryland Environmental Service collects a limited number of recyclables (plastic bottles, cans, glass, cardboard and paper). In an era where many municipalities take plastics 1-‐6, plastic bags, boxboard, and even offer curbside composting, our options are limited. Reducing our landfill bound trash requires giving individuals easy options to place appropriate items in a recycling or compost bin. Combined with an education campaign and signage, this would have a significant impact. Each classroom, office, and meeting space should offer each of the three “waste” streams and be supported by transfer station located by the kitchen to keep each stream separate. A move to a commercial recycling hauler would expand the types of materials that can be recycled and simplify the sorting process on campus. Our area is served by haulers who offer “single stream” or co-‐mingled recyclables that are then hauled to a Material Resource Recovery Facility or MRRF. Student Engagement The Environmental Club can take a lead in conducting an audit of our waste stream to better understand the amount that is recycled, composted, and landfilled. Club members can also be involved with identifying opportunities to reduce, reuse, and recycle items. The effectiveness of any recycling and composting programs is directly related to the amount of attention and engagement they receive from everyone in the community. Club members can be tasked with weighing, sorting, and tracking our composting and recycling efforts. Accountability from the entire community will be required to effect change.

Indoor Recycling Stations

Classroom and Workroom Recycling

Purchasing Altering our purchasing behaviors will have a significant, and often visible, impact on our waste stream. Therefore we recommend that wherever practicable, Gunston will give preference to environmentally superior products, where quality, function, and cost are equal or superior. All employees are encouraged to select products that comply with this procedure, unless the cost/benefit tradeoff cannot be justified and documented at the time of purchase. As contracts are renewed, each vendor should be informed of our efforts and every effort made to comply with our new purchasing standards. Student and Faculty Engagement This is an area of “low hanging fruit” where we can make a very visible statement and educate visitors to the campus. Over two years at Gunston, many questions have arisen that fall into this category. ● Why are the cups in the cafeteria disposable and not reusable/recyclable/compostable? ● Why do we have single serving water bottles at dances/sports games/open houses? ● Why do we use individually wrapped coffee in the break rooms? ● How do we know that what goes in the compost bin actually makes it to the pile? ● Why can’t we recycle plastic containers that typically hold fruit or salads? The list of questions goes on. We can generate significant buy-‐in, publicity, and a great degree of visible impact by continuing to prioritize addressing these opportunities.

2.8 Proposal: Sustainability Coordinator and Environmental Sustainability Committee Addressing and improving Gunston’s sustainability requires collaborative effort from a variety of stakeholders. Coordinating our collective effort will be streamlined through having a full or part-‐time sustainability coordinator. Only twenty seven percent of independent schools have a sustainability coordinator; thus, allocating funds for the position is a demonstration of Gunston’s commitment to the goals of this transformative plan.9 The role of the Sustainability Coordinator will include: ● In partnership with the school’s leadership team, coordinate the implementation of the Environmental Strategic Plan ● Organize and chair the school’s “Green Team” ● Coordinate communication with the school’s strategic sustainability partners ● Support the EfS Curriculum Working Group ● In partnership with the advancement office, coordinate proposals and solicitations for sustainability. ● Oversee the Environmental Club and plan the annual Earth Day Celebration, ● Supervise the implementation of the sustainability service requirement ● Direct Bay Studies Program Forming an Environmental Sustainability Committee (or “Green Team”) is key to applying the recommendations contained within this document and to quickly effect change that will spur all of the Environmental Strategic Planning efforts forward. Green Team: possible members ● Sustainability Coordinator ● Head of School ● Business Manager ● Facilities Manager ● Board Member ● Environmental Club student representative ● Administrative representatives ● Faculty representatives 9 Chapman, Paul. How America’s Schools Are Going Green -‐-‐ and How Yours Can, Too. 12/7/2015 60

The Green Team would meet monthly to address issues of environmental sustainability at Gunston. The Team will research, advise, and recommend actions that align with the Guiding Principles of the Environmental Strategic Plan. Representatives will update their constituents following monthly meetings. 2.9 Proposal: Green Revolving Fund Improving sustainability requires the investment of financial resources but often yield savings as more efficient products are installed. Establishing a Green Revolving Fund whereby the financial savings from one project are applied to future environmental issues will help Gunston continue to address environmental sustainability. For instance, investing in water bottle filling stations will allow us to discontinue our bottled water contract, saving the school $800 annually. Additionally, a promotional rate for students with driver’s licenses who continue to use the bus service may increase ridership and revenue for the school while reducing our carbon emissions. Moreover, our research reveals that there is considerable grant money available for many projects that address sustainable infrastructure. The strongest grant applications require matching funds. Gunston could leverage monies from the fund to win grants. The creation of a Green Revolving Fund has been highly recommended by colleges and universities who have utilized this type of fund to propel green infrastructure changes.

2.10 Five year plan to develop a model campus for sustainability and restoration for a waterfront school. Target Area/ Activity

Timeline

Evaluation

Responsible Party

Guiding Principles for Decision Makers

Spring 2016

Document Review

Board of Trustees, Head of School

Sustainability Audit

Spring 2016

Grounds and Landscaping

Spring 2016

2016-‐2018

Signage and Monitoring 2016-‐2017

Energy Consumption

Waste Stream and Purchasing

2017-‐2020

2016-‐2017

Document Review

Board of Trustees, Head of School

Consult with landscape architect on shoreline restoration and stormwater management plan

Head of School, Director of Facilities, Sustainability Coordinator

Secure funding for restoration projects

Engage students in restoration projects on campus

Evaluate and propose budget for improved signage

Energy Audit and Conservation Action Plan Review

Head of School, Sustainability Coordinator

Sustainability Coordinator

Board of Trustees, Director of Facilities, Sustainability Coordinator

Install water bottle filling stations; Discourage disposable water bottles at campus events

Director of Facilities, Sustainability Coordinator

3. Community Partnerships

3.1 Partnerships: Outreach and Collaboration The Gunston School has been charged by the Strategic Plan, approved by the Board of Trustees in 2014, to become a regional and national leader in environmental teaching and learning. One key to this evolution is expanding our outreach and collaborative partnerships. Gunston has many fantastic program partners and enduring relationships, formed to support the Bay Studies program.

We are excited to announce that we have furthered our partnership with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and will be working together to present professional development and youth leadership workshops for students and educators throughout the region. Additionally, Gunston has brought together the Association of Independent Maryland & DC Schools, Virginia Association of Independent Schools, and the Association of Independent Schools of Greater Washington in an unprecedented collaboration to co-‐brand these workshops.

Our efforts will be directed towards the following programs: ● A CBF/Gunston One-‐Day Teacher Conference for Independent School Educators: The goal of this conference would be to connect and train AIMS educators in “Save the Bay”-‐focused educational pedagogy. The focus of this conference is action projects and implementing best practices at schools, utilizing Gunston as a case study. This workshop has been scheduled for April 2016 and is advertised in the AIMS Professional Development Calendar. The workshop will be led by Amanda Gibson of CBF and Emily Beck. ● School Leadership Retreat for Non-‐Public School Leaders: This three-‐day, residential retreat is open to school administrative leaders across the watershed and is co-‐branded with AIMS. VAIS, and AISGW . This has the potential of connecting private school leaders from MD, VA, DE, DC, WV, PA, and NY, with an aim towards sharing pedagogy, data, etc. The retreat will be based at one of CBF’s Island Centers and by co-‐developed and lead by CBF and Gunston. John Lewis will serve as the Lead Principle for the retreat. ● A multi-‐day CBF/Gunston Teacher Retreat for environmental educators: Similar to the School Leaders program but running five days in length, this workshop will occur at one of CBF’s Island Centers and utilize Gunston’s campus. The retreat will be led by CBF educators and Emily Beck will serve as lead teacher. • An CBF/Gunston Environmental Youth Leadership Summit: Aimed at students from AIMS schools, this event would be similar to the MAEOE conference at Sandy Point, but with a much more focused audience of students and educators. Perhaps this could connect with CBF's student leadership programs. Gunston could serve as the host site.

3.2 Strategic Partnerships Our list of strategic partnerships is lengthy, thanks mostly to two decades of environmental education programming around our Earth Day and Bay Studies programs. Collaborative partnerships are dynamic and ever evolving. Below, we have developed a working list of current and potential partners. Internally, the list is segmented by the current strength of our partnership connection. Be advised that 1) this is a fluid, working list, aimed at capturing a snapshot in time of our current partnerships and 2) it is not exhaustive-‐-‐there are invariably other worthy partnership groups that are not yet included on the list and we are actively seeking to expand our partnerships. ● Group A Partners: These are groups with whom we have a deep, enduring, and personal and/or multi-‐year programmatic relationship. These relationships may have been formed over years or through a Gunston parent, alumni or Board member at the organization. ● Group B Partners: These program partnerships are established, ongoing, and ripe for evolving. The duration of the relationship may be shorter or more intermittent. Our connection to organizations in this quadrant originate through many channels. We are building shared understanding and have a mutual understanding. ● Group C Partners: To use the author Malcolm Gladwell’s term, we have the “strength of ‘weak ties’” with these organizations, in that we connect with these groups on a semi-‐regular basis to promote the mutual aims of both Gunston and the partner organization. Partners listed in Group C deserve special attention from our Green Team and Sustainability Coordinator, as they may offer more opportunities for creativity and innovation. ● Group D Partners: These represent a broad array of funders, program providers, institutions of higher education that have much to offer. Drawing on Gladwell’s work again, establishing a connection with each of these places us in a position to share ideas and learn about threats and opportunities in time to respond to them. Cultivating these relationships will keep us dynamic and innovative. As part of our ongoing efforts, the school will develop a “partnership rubric”, and conduct an annual evaluation of our relationship with current and potential partners.

Strategic and Developing Partnerships Adkins Arboretum

Maryland Association of Environmental and Outdoor Educators Association of Independent Schools of Maryland and Maryland Historical Society DC Camp Pecometh Maryland Master Gardeners Chesapeake Bay Environmental Center Maryland Ornithology Society Chesapeake Bay Foundation Maryland Wood Duck Initiative Chesapeake Bay Funders Network Mason’s Farms Chesapeake Bay Trust Midshore Community Foundation Chesapeake College Midshore RiverKeepers Chesapeake Maritime Museum Oyster Recovery Partnership Chesapeake Wildlife Heritage Phillips Wharf Environmental Center Chester River Association Pickering Creek Audubon Center Colchester Farms Salisbury University Corsica River Conservancy Sassafras River Association Delaware National Estuarine Research Reserve Skipjack Rebecca Ruark Delmarva Nesting Foundation St. Brigid's Farm Delmarva Power Sultana Education Foundation Ducks Unlimited Town Creek Foundation Eastern Neck Wildlife Refuge UMD at Horn Point Eastern Shore Land Conservancy UVA Bay Game Easton Municipal Services Washington College Echo Hill Outdoor School Waterfowl Chesapeake Environmental Concern Waterfowl Festival Harry R. Hughes Center for Agro-‐Ecology Wye River School Homestead Farms YMCA Camp Gunston Horizons of Queen Anne’s County

3.3 Philanthropy The ‘environmental movement’ has attracted significant financial support through charitable giving, public and private grants, and tax incentives. The Environmental Strategic Plan positions Gunston to tap into many of these opportunities. Charitable giving focused on environmental education and climate change is receiving renewed support following the climate change accord in Paris in December, 2015. Currently, Gunston does not have a dedicated sustainability grant writer on its staff. Our one-‐person development office is tasked with Gunston’s annual campaign, Heron Fund campaign, fund raising events, and building our alumni network. Therefore, the sustainability coordinator will need to become the primary grant writer and contact for follow up and evaluation of grants received. Only a fraction of grants are successful, but each requires careful research, relationship building, time to prepare. Dedicating 30% of the Sustainability Coordinator’s time to the task will be vital to build a successful funding stream. Grants alone won’t fund the projects outlined in this document. We will need a mix of grants, donations, and capital expenses to leverage our connections, supply matching funds, and demonstrate Gunston’s financial commitment to improving its own sustainability. A Board level committee on philanthropy can help identify individuals and private funders Gunston should be meeting with.

3.4 Five-‐year plan to expand strategic partnerships to leverage The Gunston School’s role as a regional and national leader in environmental teaching and learning. Target Area/ Activity

Timeline

Evaluation

Responsible Party

One day workshop at Gunston

Sustainability Coordinator, CBF Staffers

CBF Partnership

Strategic Partnerships

Spring 2016

Summer 2016

2017-‐2018

2016-‐2018

Philanthropy

2016

2017

2018

Chesapeake Classroom School Leaders program

Sustainability Coordinator, CBF Staffers

Launch Youth Leadership Summit

Sustainability Coordinator, CBF Staffers

Rubric development and implementation

Develop database of potential funders and grants to pursue

Work with strategic partners to apply for funding as partners

Establish MOU’s with partner organizations to utilize funding sources

Head of School, Sustainability Coordinator

Sustainability Coordinator

Sustainability Coordinator, Head of School

Board of Trustees, Head of School

Appendix 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Bibliography Cloud Institute Scope of Work Sustainable Schools LLC Proposal Proposal from Chesapeake Wildlife Heritage Field House Lighting Proposal

6. Supporting Documents a. National Association of Independent Schools Sustainability Standard b. NAIS “How American Schools are Going Green” c. NAIS “Skilled by Nature” d. NAIS “How to Build a Sustainable Dining Program” e. Gunston’s Multum in Parvo 2014 f. Maryland Native Plants List g. Maryland Schoolyard Habitat Partnership “Common Qualities of Excellent Schoolyards” h. New York Times Article “Preschool Without Walls”

Selected Bibliography Agenda 21 : Programme of Action for Sustainable Development ; Rio Declaration on Environment and Development ; Statement of Forest Principles: The Final Text of Agreements Negotiated by Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. New York, NY: United Nations Dept. of Public Information, 1993. Print. Barber, Dan. The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food. Penguin, 2014. Print. Berry, Wendell. Bringing It to the Table: On Farming and Food. Berkeley: Counterpoint :, 2009. Print. Bourne, Joel K. The End of Plenty: The Race to Feed a Crowded World. Print. Bruntland, Gro Harlem. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1987. Print. Conference of the Parties Twenty-‐first session Paris, 30 November to 11 December 2015 Edwards, Andres R. The Sustainability Revolution: Portrait of a Paradigm Shift (Canada: New Society Publishers) 2005. Ernst, Howard R. Chesapeake Bay Blues: Science, Politics, and the Struggle to save the Bay. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Print. Ernst, Julie A., and Martha C. Monroe. Evaluating Your Environmental Education Program A Workbook for Practitioners. NAAEE, 2009. Print. Excellence in Environmental Education: Guidelines for Learning (K-12) : Executive Summary & Self Assessment Tool. Rock Spring, GA: North American Association for Environmental Education, 1999. Print. Goleman, Daniel, and Lisa Bennett. Ecoliterate How Educators Are Cultivating Emotional, Social, and Ecological Intelligence. San Francisco: Jossey-‐Bass, 2012. Print. House, Freeman. Totem Salmon Life Lessons from Another Species. Boston: Beacon, 1999. Print. Horton, Tom. An Island out of Time: A Memoir of Smith Island in the Chesapeake. New York: W.W. Norton, 1996. Print. 98

Horton, Tom. Turning the Tide Saving the Chesapeake Bay. Rev. and Expanded ed. Washington, D.C.: Island, 2003. Print. Kolbert, Elizabeth. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. Print. Kolbert, Elizabeth. Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change. New York: Bloomsbury Pub. :, 2006. Print. Kurlansky, Mark. Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World. New York: Walker, 1997. Print. Lappe, Anna. Diet for a Hot Planet: The Climate Crisis at the End of Your Fork and What You Can Do about It. New York: Bloomsbury USA, 2010. Print. Lappe, Francis. Hope's Edge: The next Diet for a Small Planet. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam, 2002. Print. "Laudato Si' (24 May 2015) | Francis." Laudato Si' (24 May 2015) | Francis. Web. 2 Jan. 2016. Lieberman, Gerald. Education and the Environment: Creating Standards-Based Programs in Schools and Districts. Harvard Education, 2013. Print. Llavador, Humberto, and John E. Roemer. Sustainability for a Warming Planet. Harvard Education, 2015. Print. Louv, Richard. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin of Chapel Hill, 2005. Print. Masumoto, David Mas. Epitaph for a Peach: Four Seasons on My Family Farm. Print. Orr, David W. Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect. Washington, DC: Island, 1994. Print. President’s Council on Sustainable Development. Education for Sustainability: An Agenda for Action (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office) 1994. Pollan, Michael. The Botany of Desire: A Plant's Eye View of the World. New York: Random House, 2001. Print. 99

Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print. Safina, Carl. Song for the Blue Ocean: Encounters along the World's Coasts and beneath the Seas. New York: Henry Holt, 1999. Print. Sobel, David. Childhood and Nature: Design Principles for Educators. Stenhouse, 2008. Print. Senge, Peter et. al. Learning for Sustainability (Society for Organizational Learning) 2006. Stone, Michael K. Ecological Literacy: Educating Our Children for a Sustainable World. San Francisco: Sierra Club ;, 2005. Print. Warner, William W. Beautiful Swimmers: Watermen, Crabs, and the Chesapeake Bay. Boston: Little, Brown, 1976. Print.

100