Members of the TLC met to further a discussion on climate change education and possible research interests which could be taken further. The article we read beforehand was:
Joseph Henderson, David Long, Paul Berger, Constance Russell & Andrea Drewes (2017) Expanding the Foundation: Climate Change and Opportunities for Educational Research, Educational Studies, 53:4, 412-425.
This article looks at what research has offered the knowledge base of climate change education and points to this as insufficient before outlining some possible avenues for further research.
At the Zoom meeting we were in small groups to begin with, looking closely at the text of the article (a good way to keep focused!) which raised issues of teachers’ anxieties over teaching climate change – in part as this requires dealing with individuals’ values and the fact that this ‘includes entertaining the possibility that those [values] might need to change. This can often invoke anxiety and resistance’ (p.149). For example, neo-liberal values and ideas on wealth, materialism, economic development and individual goals may need to be reviewed. Are teachers prepared for this and professionally supported in doing so?
Back in the main room we discussed some of the ideas further and our interests included: how young people think and feel about the issue, what their perspectives are and how and to what extent these views are reflected in the curriculum. Coming from different angles another interest was: the nature and purpose of climate change pedagogy – various comments on what a critical pedagogy for climate change education could/should look like were suggested and research into an evidence base for such a pedagogy could be an avenue to explore.
An interest in the content knowledge for teaching climate change was raised, including the question of what do teachers access when preparing for teaching and do they feel ready for teaching one of the biggest challenges facing the world? How can it be effectively addressed in subjects outside science and geography? What should teachers say when students express their sadness or worries openly? This linked to a question over whether the current curriculum offered a framework broad enough to deal with the scale of the issue – not referring to climate change on a global scale – but that students need more than the facts. What should they do with those facts? How should they respond? The affective dimension of climate change education is considered by David Hicks who presents a model for curriculum development which draws upon knowing, feeling, choosing, acting.
Academic and teaching staff, and PGR students, with varied experiences all showed interest in working together in order to responded to the paper’s call for more educational research into climate change education. The GW4 Climate Change Network was highlighted as a transdisciplinary network involving researchers working with teachers to provide active support for research on climate change education. The TLC meeting was packed with ideas (we ran out of time but didn’t overrun!) and there seemed to be lots of possibilities to take forwards. The group were asked to share readings or other materials which could stimulate further discussion at the next meeting in March.
By Nicola Warren-Lee