At first glance, public knowledge of climate science appears encouraging. When prompted, most people can correctly identify some of the contributors to climate change. But they are much less likely to do so when they are not shown a checklist of possible causes. This study examined public understanding of two commonly used terms: “global warming” and “climate change.” The findings have important implications for informal science educators seeking to develop effective programmes and exhibitions on climate science.
The findings of this study suggest that pre-service teachers do not adequately understand key concepts in climate science. They see the greenhouse effect as a problem, not as a natural phenomenon. By contrast, they inaccurately see chlorofluorocarbons as key contributors to global warming. The practical implication is that training programmes for teachers—and indeed for other learners—need to explain key terms more effectively. These programmes must also emphasize the links among causes, consequences, and solutions.
In this study, researchers investigated levels of awareness of and responsibility for global climate change in two groups of children. The researchers argue that understanding the nature of beliefs, and how they may be modified by particular influences, is important if educators are to challenge the status quo, in which “the majority of individuals do not believe that they are responsible for or can engage in any actions which will be environmentally efficacious” (Uzzell, 2000, p. 314).
In this article, the author offers explanations for what is characterized as startling disconnect between the scientific consensus around climate change and the lack of a social consensus. The author brings attention to this disconnect by offering some explanations for what may be contributing factors to a limited public discourse on science topics such as a lack of training and/or support for scientists communicating about their research. Twelve "Rules of Engagement" are proposed in order to to begin a conversation about how scholars can effectively and appropriately communicate about their
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
University of MichiganAndrew Hoffman
Although informal learning environments have been studied extensively, ours is one of the first studies to quantitatively assess the impact of learning in botanical gardens on students' cognitive achievement. We observed a group of 10th graders participating in a one-day educational intervention on climate change implemented in a botanical garden. The students completed multiple-choice questionnaires in a pre-post-retention test design. Comparing the test scores revealed a significant short-term knowledge gain as well as a long-term knowledge gain. Consequently, our results show the potentials
How we communicate the dangers of climate change may influence attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. Here we test two pairs of positive and negative framing statements with North American citizen scientists interested in gardening and birdwatching. Mentioning dangers for humans did not increase participants’ interest in taking personal action on climate change, but mentioning dangers for birds was highly effective. Highlighting the positive collective impacts of small behavioral changes also increased participants’ interest in taking personal action. These results suggest that while some dire