Citation
Changing the climate of beliefs

Material Information

Title:
Changing the climate of beliefs a conceptual model of learning design elements to promote climate change literacy
Added title page title:
Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote climate change literacy
Creator:
Marzettaa, Katrina Leona ( autor )
Place of Publication:
Denver, Colo.
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file (128 pages) : ;

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Doctor of philosophy)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
School of Education and Human Development, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Education and human development

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Instructional systems -- Design ( lcsh )
Climatic changes -- Psychological effects ( lcsh )
Global warming -- Psychological effects ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
Science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society as it opens doors to high-paying professions as well as demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water quality standards and population density (Barton, 2008). Understanding science that impacts our present and future, like the science of climate change, is imperative for making critical life choices. Climate change is a difficult subject to teach because it requires complex scientific understandings and is connected to personal beliefs (Spence, Poortinga & Pidgeon, 2012). It is important to teach students the science of climate change and impact their personal beliefs to produce behavior that will mitigate climate change. In this study, learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy in higher education were identified and a conceptual model was developed to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy. Findings depicted three design elements that increase students' Climate Change Literacy: 1) Decreasing students' psychological distance from climate change, 2) Utilizing students' sense of place, and 3) Student investigation of their own research questions. Increasing students' Climate Change Literacy is the critical first step in making societal transformations required for mitigating climate change, our most pressing environmental issue that impacts all people and the natural environment (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012).
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Katrina Leona Marzetta.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver Collections
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
985619807 ( OCLC )
ocn985619807
Classification:
LD1193.E35 2016d M37 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
CHANGING THE CLIMATE OF BELIEFS:
A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF
LEARNING DESIGN ELEMENTS TO PROMOTE CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY
By
KATRINA LEONA MARZETTA B.A., University of Denver, 2004
M.A., University of Colorado Denver, 2008
M.A., University of Denver, 2011
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education and Human Development
2016


2016
KATRINA LEONA MARZETTA
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy degree by
Katrina Leona Marzetta has been approved for the Education and Human Development By
Robert (Bud) Talbot, Chair Alan Davis, Advisor Bryan Wee
Susan Connors


Marzetta, Katrina Leona (PhD, Education and Human Development)
Changing the Climate of Beliefs: Effects of Experiential and Place-based Education on University Students' Climate Change Literacy
Thesis directed by Associate Professor Alan Davis
ABSTRACT
Science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society as it opens doors to high-paying professions as well as demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water quality standards and population density (Barton, 2008). Understanding science that impacts our present and future, like the science of climate change, is imperative for making critical life choices. Climate change is a difficult subject to teach because it requires complex scientific understandings and is connected to personal beliefs (Spence, Poortinga & Pidgeon, 2012). It is important to teach students the science of climate change and impact their personal beliefs to produce behavior that will mitigate climate change. In this study, learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy in higher education were identified and a conceptual model was developed to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy. Findings depicted three design elements that increase students' Climate Change Literacy: 1) Decreasing students' psychological distance from climate change, 2) Utilizing students' sense of place, and 3) Student investigation of their own research questions. Increasing students' Climate Change Literacy is the critical first step in making societal transformations required for mitigating climate change, our most pressing environmental issue that impacts all people and the natural environment (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012).
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Alan Davis
IV


TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION......................................................................1
Background and Research Question..................................................3
Significance......................................................................4
Limitations.......................................................................8
II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK..............................................................9
Proposed Climate Change Literacy Framework.......................................11
Climate Change Literacy Component 1: Understanding............................14
Climate Change Literacy Component 2: Beliefs..................................15
Climate Change Literacy Component 3: Behavior.................................16
Understanding, Beliefs, and Behavior Working Together.........................17
Proposed Conceptual Ecology Framework.........................................18
Proposed Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy ......19
Conceptual Framework Context..................................................20
Literature Review................................................................20
Research on Teaching Climate Change Understanding.............................20
Research on Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior...............................26
Research on Experiential and Place-based Education............................29
This Study's Place in Science Education Literature............................32
III. PILOT STUDY.....................................................................34
Methods..........................................................................34
Overview and Research Design..................................................34
Setting: Course Description and Location......................................35
Participants..................................................................39
Quantitative Data Instruments and Collection..................................40
Qualitative Data Instruments and Collection...................................41
Quantitative Data Analysis....................................................43
Qualitative Data Analysis.....................................................43
Mixed Methods Triangulation Analysis..........................................44
Methods' Purpose..............................................................44
v


Pilot Results......................................................................45
CCBBS Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test......................................45
CCBBS Analysis: Coding of Open Response Items..................................46
CCCT Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test.......................................50
Comparing Assessments and Aggregated Scores....................................52
IV. A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY COURSE DESIGN.......................54
Discussion of Pilot Results........................................................54
CCBBS..........................................................................54
CCCT...........................................................................60
Focus Group and Observations...................................................61
Mini Case Studies..............................................................62
Participant Three..........................................................63
Participant One............................................................65
Limitations of Pilot Study.........................................................66
Conclusions........................................................................67
Research Product: Learning Design Elements for Promoting CCL Conceptual Model......68
Conceptual Model's Significance....................................................71
Next Steps.........................................................................72
REFERENCES.................................................................................75
APPENDIX
A. Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey Sources.................................85
B. Climate Change Concept Test Sources................................................87
C. Study Instruments..................................................................92
D. Pilot Data........................................................................102
E. Additional Resources..............................................................112
VI


LIST OF TABLES
TABLES
1. The competency levels of Environmental Literacy (Roth, 1992, p. 18)..........................10
2. Competency level indicators for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (modified
from Roth, 1992, p. 27-34)...................................................................12
3. Qualitative questions and procedures from Nam and Ito's study (2011, p. 234-235).............23
4. Learning methodology for the global climate change unit studied by Rule and Meyer (2009, p.
341).........................................................................................24
5. Student disposition towards five statements about global warming in Rule and Meyer's study
(2009, p. 345)...............................................................................25
6. Self-reported participant demographic and descriptive statistics.............................39
7. General question posed to participants in the CCBBS and purpose for asking them..............40
8. CCBBS statistics.............................................................................46
9. Coding of open responses for the pre and post CCBBS..........................................49
10. CCCT statistics for questions 1.1-20.a......................................................51
11. CCCT statistics for questions 12.1-33.......................................................52
12. Participants' overall aggregated score statistics for the CCBBS and CCCT....................53
vii


LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES
1. Photograph near Bryce Canyon National Park in Southern Utah (Marzetta, 2015)..........
2. Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote CCL (Marzetta, 2015).......19,
3. Political identity and science understanding (Roth, 1992, p. 12)......................
4. The Experiential Learning Cycle and regions of the cerebral cortex (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 195).
5. Course schedule of specific topics, reading, and guest speakers.......................
6. The urban farm house in What Ridge, Colorado that served at the classroom (Weaver, 2016) ..
7. The urban farm's wetlands and fields that served as research sites for much of the course
(Marzetta, 2016)......................................................................
8. Observation field notes format (Evertson & Green, 1995)...............................
9. Revised conceptual model: Learning Design Elements for Promoting CCL (Marzetta, 2016).
10. The author and Oreo the goat at the urban farm.......................................
.. 1
68
28
30
37
38
38
42
69
74


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The colorful rock layers of this region and arid climate illustrate the story of climate change. The fossils found here are very different from the flora and fauna currently surviving.
Once lush and tropical, all that remain of this environment is beautiful geology
Pink limestone and fossilized gastropods.
How many visiting this area understand this land's story And its thread in their own ?
Figure 1. Photograph near Bryce Canyon National Park in Southern Utah (Marzetta, 2015).
Just because the current cohort of college students is part of the "climate change generation" which grew up in an era of greater awareness and scientific certainty about climate change does not mean that students themselves have a meaningful understanding of climate change issues or act upon that understanding.
(Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012, pp. 137-138)


Teaching Climate Change Is a lot like searching for lucky stones after storms on the beaches of Lake Erie
"otoliths" my grandma called them
tiny ear bones of long dead fish like ivory
impressed with letters "g" or "I"
that now, arranged on a desk,
read like scrabble tiles of ancient text speak-
good luck, good luck, good
luck, you're gonna need it.
You are like a small man gone to find balance in miles of sand and dark water, then returned to a room, expecting to feel bigger than before.
My students arrive every Tuesday
and Thursday afternoon, asking questions
"How worried should we be?"
Swiftly my voice rolls out, "very" like a wave breaking over itself, then pulling back.
"So what should we do?" they ask and I try to hear goodness and grace, a little luck, and the sounds of a lake falling through trees at night, and any words that might begin an answer.
(Siperstein, 2014, p. 20-21)
2


Background and Research Question
Understanding science is critical because it helps us to better understand ourselves and our environment. Science education is not about students memorizing facts, but understanding and applying concepts that impact their daily lives. It is teaching critical thinking and problem solving. Science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society as it opens doors to high-paying professions.
It provides a knowledge base for informed conversations with health care workers, educators, and leaders. Science also demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water pollution, population growth, toxic dumping, and building regulations (Barton, 2008).
Therefore, understanding science that impacts our present and future, like the science of climate change, is imperative for making critical life choices.
Climate change has become one of the most (if not the most) severe environmental problem to arise in the last two decades that impacts our daily lives. A vast body of literature has emerged that illustrates how human activity since the Industrial Revolution has significantly changed global climate systems (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). Although there are regional variations in the degree and extent of climate change, there is now collective research confirming rising ocean and land temperatures, increasing variability in precipitation, as well as more intense tropical cyclones (Salinger, 2005; United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2014). Thus, dangerous climate change is one of the most urgent social risks humans face today. Therefore, understanding the science, beliefs, and behaviors around climate change is critical in making major societal transformations required for mitigation (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). The educational arena is critical for initiating such societal transformations. Consequently, learning design elements that cultivate climate change understanding through student beliefs and behavior is necessary.
3


The purpose of this study is to develop a conceptual model that depicts learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy in higher education. The question that guides this pilot study is: What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy1?
Experiential and Place-based Education are both philosophies and methods that teach through action directly tied to students' understanding and beliefs through experiences. Consequently, they may provide insight into the specific learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy. Experiential Education (ExEd) is defined as "education ... that makes conscious application of the students' experiences by integrating them into the curriculum where experience involves any combination of senses, emotions..., physical condition..., and cognition" (Carver, 2008, pp. 150-151). Place-based Education (PbEd) utilizes learners' connections to places where place refers not only to a physical location, but the relationships and meanings that learners attach to places (Gruenewald, 2003; Sobel, 2004). Learners use these different place attachments, their sense of place, to comprehend concepts. PbEd validates different ways of knowing the world through inclusive curriculum and instruction. Due to ExEd and PbEd's cultivation of students' emotions and experiences to impact their beliefs, behavior, and understanding these teaching methods hold promise for evoking true transformation in students to "begin an answer". Significance
Students entering higher education institutions will be required to make complex decisions about climate change mitigation and will need to do so from an informed perspective. "Erroneous" understandings regarding climate change issues are a real concern due to the significant impacts of climate change on humans and nature alike (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). Thus, "higher
1The components of Climate Change Literacy include climate change understanding, beliefs, and mitigation behavior. Climate Change Literacy is further discussed in CHAPTER II: Conceptual Frameworks.
4


education needs to expand its efforts to ensure all university graduates understand the scientific consensus about climate change and are actively engaged as part of the solution in their public and private roles" (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012, p. 138). Yet this is not occurring.
Wachholz, Arts, and Chene (2012) surveyed 375 students representing a cross-section of disciplines at a mid-sized university in New England and their results were disconcerting at best. Most students held misinformation about the basic causes and consequences of climate change, especially surrounding the ozone hole. In fact, the majority of students surveyed were not aware Earth is already experiencing the consequences of climate change: One in three students responded there is a lot of disagreement among scientists about whether climate change is even happening (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). These findings most likely represent students' exposure to manufactured controversies produced by media, interest groups, and politicians who are funded by the fossil fuel industry (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). Most concerning was students' lack of personal action to reduce gas emissionsonly 15 percent were attempting to reduce their carbon footprint (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). These results tie into Crona, Wutich, Brewis, and Gartin's (2013) research, which correlates higher education with higher income and lower involvement in rural economies and/or direct extraction of natural resources. Those with higher education tend to have a lower sense of personal risk towards the effects of climate change due to their lack of direct experience with it. Another possible reason students did not act to mitigate climate change is their belief that it is not an ethical problem (Markowitz, 2012). This may stem from students' conviction that current climate change is not human induced in any way.
As indicated by these studies, climate change is a difficult subject to teachespecially if understanding and mitigation behavior are learning outcomes. Understanding climate change requires the comprehension of complex scientific concepts like the carbon cycle, atmospheric circulation, as well as regional and temporal variations in weather versus climate. It is also difficult
5


to teach climate change because personal beliefs enter the scientific conversation (Li, Johnson, & Zaval, 2011; Markowitz, 2012; Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012; Wachholz, Arts,
& Chene, 2012). This is a similar problem faced by educators of germ theory and evolution. Not often do people say, "I don't believe in gravity," but frequently is heard, "I don't believe in climate change." The two foremost reasons are:
The temporal and geographic scale in which climate change operates.
o The large scale of climate change makes it difficult to "see" or "feel" (unlike gravity), especially when there are local fluctuations that mask trends. This makes climate change very different to understand and accept.
The manufactured controversy surrounding climate change.
o Greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced to less than one third of current levels to stabilize atmospheric concentrations, which would require a major transformation of the energy sector (Hassol, 2002). This would negatively impact many wealthy stakeholders, interest groups, and politicians supported by the fossil fuel industry (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). These groups have considerable influence on their supporters.
For students to understand climate change science and support climate change mitigation through personal action, they must believe in the phenomenon, its cause, and in their ability to make a difference. Clement, Henning, and Osbaldiston (2014) found people are more likely to conserve energy when they believe their efforts will effectively reduce environmental problems. Students' ability (and belief in their ability) to produce effective change needs to be part of climate change education.
6


Science educators must understand the strong link between understanding and belief. It is
possible to understand something, but not believe in it. This leads students to understand the science behind climate change, but not "believe" in climate change. Thus, students do not change their behaviors to mitigate climate change even though they may score well on a climate change concept test. This is seen in the research of Nam and Ito (2011) as well as Rule and Meyer (2009). In fact, students may develop their "belief" in climate change before their scientific understanding. This may make it difficult for students to comprehend or accept the science of climate change, as it does not support what students already think they know. This idea is confirmed through Kahan's study conducted in 2015.
To say there is "no relationship" between science comprehension and belief in climate change would definitely be incorrect. There is a very large one. But the nature of it depends on the test takers' identities. Those whose cultural commitments predispose them to be concerned about climate change become even more so as their level of science comprehension increases. Those whose commitments predispose them to be less concerned become all the more skeptical. (Kahan, 2015, p. 12)
It is not enough to teach the "facts" of climate change through climatology research
because science is intended to be objective and free of emotion. Science educators cannot assume
students will utilize critical thinking to understand climate change and act to mitigate it simply by
being exposed to research. Students do not leave their emotions, beliefs, and behaviors at the
threshold of the science classroom. It is important to not only teach students about climate change,
but also impact their personal beliefs to produce behavior that will mitigate climate change.
You have to love something and believe in the danger it faces to protect it
when its protection means personal struggle.
7


Literature on students' climate change understanding, beliefs, and behavior (i.e., Climate
Change Literacy) has focused on primary and secondary education (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). The research on post-secondary students tends to be over a decade old, narrowly focused on climate change facts, and does not examine the impact of ExEd or PbEd on students' climate change understanding, beliefs, or behavior. Therefore, there is a pressing need for science education research that includes examining students' beliefs and behaviors along with their understanding due to the severity of climate change as a human induced environmental risk. Students must understand the scientific consensus around climate change and be actively engaged in "an answer". Consequently, science educators must understand what learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy.
Limitations
The study is limited because there are few university courses that use Experiential and Place-based Education in the teaching of climate change. Both methods require small class sizes, which unfortunately is a rarity in higher education. Additionally, both methods rely on student experiences and emotional connections, which is considered taboo in Western science. Another limitation is results are only generalizable to universities with similar student demographics and course sizes. The small number of participants decreases the generalizability of results as the results may not represent a saturated sample size depicting the populations' true climate understanding, beliefs, and mitigation behaviors. Finally, diffusion of treatment (Campbell & Stanley, 1963) may occur, which is very difficult to measure. A shift in students' attitudes and understanding from pre to post cannot be unambiguously attributed to the course design elements, especially in the absence of a control group who were not involved in the course. Diffusion of treatment is due to the daily information students receive about climate change thought the media and other sources.
8


CHAPTER II
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
The purpose of science education is to provide students with the understanding and skills to live "successful, productive lives and to function as responsible citizens" (Roth, 1992, p. 10). This ideal shapes the conceptual framework of this study, which rests upon Environmental Literacy. Literacy is more than being able to read and write. The idea of literacy has evolved over time with the concept of science literacy gaining momentum in the 1960s (Roth, 1992). Simply put, science literacy is the application of science understanding and skills in the "real world" outside of school. The three major components of science literacy discussed by Miller (1989) are the following:
1. An understanding of the science processes or methods for testing models of reality,
2. A basic vocabulary of scientific and technical terms as well as concepts, and
3. An understanding of science and technology's impact on society.
Environmental Literacy stems from science literacy, but focuses on the environmental
impacts of human behaviors. Roth (1992, p. 17) states that both science and environmental literacies involve people in:
Using critical and creative thinking,
Seeking and organizing information,
Being healthily skeptical, as well as
Thinking ahead and planning.
Additionally, Environmental Literacy involves people in (Roth, 1992, p. 17):
Constantly seeing connections between objects and events;
Routinely looking for seeds of change;
Routinely evaluating the consequences of potential actions;
Routinely examining alternatives and making choices among them;
9


Constantly making choices among alternatives that have minimum negative impacts on natural systems; and
Acting responsibly as a living thing among many diverse, interacting, and interrelated life forms.
According to Roth (1992), Environmental Literacy is composed of six major areas: environmental sensitivity, knowledge, skills, affect, and behavior. However, I propose to simplify these areas into three components to more easily analyze student growth in Environmental Literacy:
1. Understanding of science concepts: Knowledge (facts) and skills;
2. Affective (Beliefs): Attitudes, values, and environmental sensitivity; and
3. Behavior: Habits and actions as well as the enactment of science knowledge and skills that supports environmental understanding.
Students' competency in Environmental Literacy is on a continuum ranging from no ability to advanced. The general competency levels of Environmental Literacy are Nominal, Functional, and Operational, which are described in Table 1.
Table 1. The competency levels of Environmental Literacy (Roth, 1992, p. 18).
Nominal Environmental Literacy Functional Environmental Literacy Operational Environmental Literacy
Indicates a person able to recognize many of the basic terms used in communicating about the environment. They are able to provide rough, if unsophisticated, working definitions of their meanings. Persons at the nominal level are developing an awareness and sensitivity towards the environment along with an attitude of respect for natural systems. They are developing a concept of the nature and magnitude of human impacts on natural systems. These persons also have a very rudimentary knowledge of how natural systems work and how human social systems interact with them. Indicates a person with a broader knowledge and understanding of the nature and interaction between human social systems and other natural systems. They are aware and concerned about the negative interaction between these systems in terms of at least one or more issues. They have developed the skills to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information about issues using primary and secondary sources. They evaluate a selected problem/issue on the basis of sound evidence and personal values and ethics. They communicate their finding and feelings to others. On issues of particular concern to them, they show a personal investment and motivation for remediation using their knowledge of basic strategies for initiating and implementing social ortechnological change. Indicates a person who has moved beyond functional literacy in both the breadth and depth of understanding and skills. They routinely evaluate the impacts and consequences of actions; gather and synthesize pertinent information; choosing among alternatives; and advocating action positions as well as taking action to sustain or enhance a healthy environment. Such people demonstrate a strong, ongoing sense of investment and responsibility for preventing or remediating environmental degradation both personally and collectively. These persons are likely to act at several levels from local to global. They are routinely engaged in dealing with the world at large.
10


General indicators were identified by Roth in 1992 in order to determine students'
Environmental Literacy competency level for each of the three components. Students may be at different competency levels in the components of Environmental Literacy (Understanding, Affective, and Behavior). This is because the degree of students' competency may depend on students'
"belief" in their science understanding, which precipitates their behavior.
Proposed Climate Change Literacy Framework
This pilot study drew on the literature regarding belief change to develop a model for designing courses to promote Climate Change Literacy Students' degree of Environmental Literacy regarding their climate change understanding will be measured by the Climate Change Content Test (Appendix Figure A8). Students' degree of Environmental Literacy regarding their climate change beliefs and behaviors will be measured by the Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey (Appendix Figure A7). The test, survey, observations, and interviews will be discussed in CHAPTER III. Consequently, students' degree of Climate Change Literacy will be investigated in this study. I propose that Climate Change Literacy is part of Environmental Literacy in which the key components are climate change understanding, beliefs, and behavior to mitigate climate change. The following table summarizes the indicators of each competency level for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (understanding, belief, and behavior), which were adapted from Roth (1992).
11


Table 2. Competency level indicators for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (modified from Roth, 1992, p. 27-34).
Competency Level Component Indicators of Climate Change Literacy
Understanding Belief Behavior
Nominal The nature of the basic components of elemental systems (especially carbon cycling) Types and examples of interactions between humans and nature Basic components of societal systems Identifying and defining problems regarding implications of climate change Recognizing issues surrounding identified climate change problems and proposed solutions Appreciation of both nature and society Elementary sensitivity and empathy for nature and society Elemental perceptions of points of conflict between nature and society Familial, school, and youth organizations, activities, and habits aimed at maintenance of environmental quality and climate change mitigation
Functional In addition to the above, students understand ecological, economic, geographic, religious, educational, and political processes leading to climate change Students understand the effects/impacts of humans on natural systems including: Population dynamics, interactions, interdependence, limiting factors, energy transfer/production/storage, degradation, biogeochemical cycling, communities, ecosystems, man as an ecological variable, uneven distribution of resources globally, understanding of scientific inquiry, thinking in terms of time frames or scales, and utilization of natural resources Students' skills include acting, judging, valuing, articulating personal values, and decision-making regarding climate change influences and impacts Identification with and concern for both society and the environment due to impacts of climate change Willingness to recognize and choose among differing values and perspectives associated with climate change Sense of stewardship Students change their lifestyle activities and behaviors by: Taking positions and actions based on the best available knowledge to mitigate climate change Taking individual and/or group action through persuasion, consumerism, political action, legal action, and eco-management to mitigate climate change
12


(Table 2 Continued)
In addition to the above, Students show affects, Students' action
students are involved with attitudes, and values that demonstrate leadership in
evaluating issues on the indicate a valuation of working toward resolution of
basis of available evidence both nature and society climate change problems
and personal values/skills Students demonstrate a including:
used in planning, sense of investment and Evaluating their impact on
implementing, and responsibility for the quality of life and
evaluating solutions for resolution of climate environment
climate change including: change Actively reducing their
Using the process skills of Motivation to actively carbon footprint and helping
scientific inquiry, using the participate in those around them to do the
ability to forecast, to think environmental same
ahead, and plan improvement and Working to maintain
Imagining, connecting, protection biological and social diversity
valuing, and analyzing Take into account Continually examining and
Using primary and secondary historical perspectives reexamining the values of
sources of information while focusing on current culture
Using the ability to separate and future climate change Making decisions based on
fact from opinion causes and consequences beneficence, justice,
Determining the roles played Taking personal stewardship, prudence,
by differing human beliefs responsibility: recognizes cooperation, and
and values in climate change impacts of personal compassion to mitigate
Operational behavior and accepts personal responsibility for climate change impacts Willingness to help correct or avoid the negative impacts of climate change Balancing love of nature with love of humanity Willingness to curtail some individual shortterm privileges for long range public and environmental good Perceptual movement from: present to future, society to humanity, isolated phenomena to interacting systems Personal environmental ethics Respects diversity of human perceptions, learning styles, and value systems climate change


The conceptual framework of Climate Change Literacy, which is nested within
Environmental Literacy, centers on Piagetian theory, where schemas are a key construct that reflect conceptual understanding, as well as how beliefs are formed which greatly influences behavior. After all, it is possible to understand the fundamental principles of climate change without believing them. (This can be reflected in students' lack of action to mitigate climate change.) The following conceptual discussion examines in detail the three components of Climate Change Literacy.
Climate Change Literacy Component 1: Understanding
Piaget considered schemas to be the building blocks of intelligent behavior. According to Piaget (1968), schemas are units of knowledge relating to objects, actions, or the abstract that are mental representations of the world. Specifically, schemas are used to understand and respond to situations we encounter (Constructionism). The older a person becomes the more numerous and elaborate their schemas are. When a person is presented with a new object, situation, or concept they will either assimilate the new information into their existing schema or accommodate their schema. Assimilation occurs when a person employs an existing schema to deal with the new situation. However, accommodation occurs when existing schemas do not work and need to be changed to cope with a new situation through the formation of new cognitive structures.
Intellectual growth occurs through these processes by means of adaptation (adjustment) to the world resulting in equilibrium. Yet, it is much more difficult to accommodate new schemas than to assimilate information into existing ones.
In order for accommodation to occur, new cognitive structures must be formed through cognitive change. Humans' intuitive schemas of the physical world make functioning in it possible. However, this intuitive knowledge may hinder the acquisition of scientific understandings (Vosniadou, loannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou, 2001; Kyriakopoulou & Vosniadou, 2013). This happens because scientific explanations of physical phenomena often violate intuitive
14


physics. For example, climate change may not translate to warmer temperatures across the globe as
suggested by one of its outcomesglobal warming. Consequently, learning science often requires accommodationthe reorganization of existing conceptual structures and the creation of new, radically different representations (Vosniadou, loannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou,
2001). Therefore, science requires the acceptance that appearances may sometimes be deceiving. Yet Vosniadou, loannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou (2001) state the disappearance of earlier conceptions is not a requirement for conceptual change as the old representations may continue or disappear. Essentially, this is often how students come to understand the science of climate change and increase their Climate Change Literacy.
Climate Change Literacy Component 2: Beliefs
People often build their beliefs around social constructs and personal experiences instead of scientific evidence (Schuldt & Roh, 2014; Akerlof, Maibach, Fitzgerald, Cedeno, & Neuman, 2013; Weber, 2010; Weber & Stern, 2011). This is especially true of students' belief in climate change (Schuldt & Roh, 2014). This is due to the influence of students' needs and values on perceptual tasks and higher-order reasoning, no matter the quality of climate change evidence or education (Cialdini et al., 1976; Balcetis & Duning, 2010; Bruner & Goodman, 1947; Hastorf & Cantril, 1954; Schuldt & Roh, 2014; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Valone, Ross & Lepper, 1985). For example, political affiliations are especially influential on a person's beliefs and values. Political identities (e.g., Democrat or Republican; liberal or conservative) are shaped early in life (Sulloway, 1995) and can be quite stable overtime (Jennings & Gregory, 1984; Newcomb, Koenig, Hacks, & Warwick, 1967). Political beliefs can shape information processing at multiple stages (Lodge & Taber, 2005), which influences beliefs including those related to science understandings. Druckman & Bolsen (2011) recently found that political values may play a larger role than knowledge in a person's response towards science-related messages. This may shape beliefs in climate change, which is a politically charged issue, as
15


well as behaviors because beliefs are often translated into action. For example, framing climate change as an economic issue that could slow economic growth instead of a public health issue may resonate more strongly with political conservatives (Nisbet, 2010).
Just as social identities (like political affiliation) impact science beliefs, so can personal connections (or lack thereof) to the science phenomena. This is because beliefs are often built on personal experiences. Thus, distance from (or lack of experience with) a concept can decrease belief in that concept. Climate change is a good example of an environmental issue that many people are psychologically distanced from, which decreases their belief in it. Many students cannot see the impact of climate change on their lives because its influence is not often directly obvious. For example, a student's parents lose over 50,000 turkeys on their farm in Iowa to avian flu, but an increase in winter temperatures due to climate change is not associated in their minds with the devastating disease's outbreak. Students' psychological distance from climate change can be explained by Construal Level Theory (CLT) developed by Liberman and Trope (2008). CLT outlines four key dimensions of psychological distance: spatial or geographical distance; temporal distance; distance between the perceiver and another individual or group; and uncertainty that an event will occur. Psychologically distant events are abstract high-level constructs composed of general decontextualized features. Conversely, psychologically close events are concrete constructs composed of specific contextual details (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Climate change is often perceived by students as distant in all CLT dimensions.
Climate Change Literacy Component 3: Behavior
The psychological distance many feel towards climate change decreases their belief in it and reduces their behavior to mitigate climate change. Survey evidence indicates people generally perceive climate change impacting geographically/temporally distant people and impacts are seen as more serious for distant locations (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Several studies also
16


found that personal risks from climate change are judged to be lower than other societal risks (Leiserowitz, Maibach, Roser-Renouf, & Smith, 2010; Spence and Pidgeon, 2010). Bridging the CLT distance of climate change requires individuals to have personal experiences with climate change. These experiences must break down the psychological distance so people will act to mitigate climate change because they consider it a personal risk and their responsibility (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Specifically, the belief that climate change is anthropogenically caused is a necessary condition (although not sufficient) for realizing personal actions can mitigate climate change (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Thus, students need to have personal experiences that illustrate anthropogenic climate change in order to shift their beliefs and behavior to mitigate it.
Understanding, Beliefs, and Behavior Working Together
Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982) suggest that students' science conceptions stem from assimilation or accommodation. In order for a student to accommodate new scientific concepts through conceptual change there must be dissatisfaction with existing conceptions, new conceptions must be intelligible as well as plausible, and a new conception must present the possibility of future research or exploration by the student (Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog,
1982, p. 214). Most importantly, a student's "current concepts, his conceptual ecology, will influence the selection of a new central concept" (Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982, p. 215). Thus, students' background knowledge and experiences (which make up students' conceptual ecology) should be utilized when introducing new scientific concepts or if conceptual change needs to occur.
17


Proposed Conceptual Ecology Framework
Conceptual ecology is defined by Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982, p. 214) as "an individual's current concepts". Conceptual ecology is similar to Piaget's schema, but is more refined into identifiable conceptions. However, I propose to extend the term conceptual ecology to represent students' knowledge and experiences that lead to their current science understanding, beliefs, and behavior. In this framework, ecology represents not only students' mental conceptions, but also the physical space that students have educative experiences in. By utilizing students' conceptual ecology, science concepts agreed upon by the international science community are integrated into students' existing experiences, understandings, beliefs, and behavior.
I propose that when students are taught controversial and confusing science concepts (such as climate change) where accommodation is required, their conceptual ecology is not often utilized. As a result, students do not fully accommodate the information. Thus students' beliefs are frequently not changed so their behavior/actions do not reflect the new science concepts they are exposed to and students' Climate Change Literacy is not increased. I also assert that accommodation is more likely to occur when students generate their own questions created from their conceptual ecology and research the answers. Accommodation is more likely to occur in these circumstances because such research experiences create the cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1962) required for students to find dissatisfaction with their existing science conceptions as discussed by Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982).
Lastly, when students learn by generating their own questions and answers created from their conceptual ecology, they decrease the psychological distance between them and the concept as suggested by Construal Level Theory. Therefore, students are more likely to change their
18


beliefs and behavior in light of their new conceptual accommodation. This would be especially helpful for increasing students' Climate Change Literacy, which is psychologically distant for many students.
Proposed Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy
Below is the initial conceptual model of learning design elements proposed for promoting Climate Change Literacy. It was created through the connections among the various conceptual frameworks previously discussed. This conceptual model was used as this study's overall guide for data analysis where Climate Change Literacy is nested within Environmental Literacy. Components of both literacies include understanding, beliefs, and behavior. Understandings and beliefs are highly connected and both impact behavior. Constructionism was the approach utilized in this study for conceptualizing student understanding. Construal Level Theory was utilized as the approach to understand student beliefs.
Figure 2. Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta, 2015).
19


The unifying approach that connected to students' understanding, beliefs, and behavior was Posner,
Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog's Conceptual Ecology. Students' Conceptual Ecology assists them to accommodate higher levels of Climate Change Literacy into their existing schemas. ExEd and PbEd are teaching methods that utilize students' conceptual ecology. Thus, constructionism, CLT, and Conceptual Ecology were the initial proposed learning design elements that may promote Climate Change Literacy.
Conceptual Framework Context
By utilizing the nested conceptual frameworks of Environmental Literacy (Figure 2), students' competency in Climate Change Literacy can be understood. In the next section, teaching methods that increase students' Climate Change Literacy (climate change understanding as well as beliefs and behavior) will be reviewed from the existing literature. However, there is limited research on the components of Climate Change Literacy, especially concerning learning design elements as well as ExEd and PbEd. This pilot study aims to contribute such knowledge to the field of science education.
Literature Review
Research on Teaching Climate Change Understanding
Global climate change is real and a currently occurring environmental threat that is influenced by humans with negative consequences for generations to come (IPCC, 2014; Solomon et al., 2007; Watson, Zinyowera, & Moss, 1996). Therefore, Climate Change Literacy has become a critical subject to teach and study. Climate Change Literacy within colleges and universities is imperative for building an informed society conscious of climate change (Johnson et al., 1997). This is especially vital for students who are not environmental science majors (McGowan, 2013). Climate Change Literacy in post-secondary education is crucial because only 20 states indirectly address atmosphere, weather, and climate concepts within their state K-12 education standards (Hoffman &
20


Barstow, 2007). Eight states fail to include these concepts in any form as part of their standards. To
increase science rigor in K-12 education and students' comprehension of STEM subjects, the Next
Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were developed by the National Academies Achieve, the
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), and the American Association for the Advancement
of Science (AAAS) in collaboration with individual states. The NGSS are one of the most recent,
rigorous, and state accepted science standards. In fact, the NGSS do include climate change for 9th-
12th grades within the Earth Space Science Progression:
The role of radiation from the sun and its interactions with the atmosphere, ocean, and land are the foundation for the global climate system. Global climate models are used to predict future changes, including changes influenced by human behavior and natural factors.
(NGSS Lead States, 2013, Appendix E, p. 3)
These standards are considered high quality, internationally benchmarked, rigorous, research-based, and aligned with expectations of college and careers (NGSS, 2013). Yet the NGSS does not state global warming is currently occurring, how it is impacting Earth, why it is occurring, or what can be done to reverse the process. Even though the standard does acknowledge that humans influence climate, climate change is presented as something that may happen in the future. However, this is not adequate to prepare students to make important life choices that impact climate change (Hoffman & Barstow, 2007).
The National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (2005) found inadequate education results in adults who do not understand global climate change, its consequences, and do not know what must be done to reduce its impacts (i.e., they are not Climate Change Literate).
These adults are hindered when making important decisions that impact them and future generations as well as the natural environment. It is estimated that approximately 80 percent of adults living in the United States are heavily influenced by incorrect or outdated environmental
21


myths on climate issues (McGowan, 2013). Additionally, 67 percent of adults living in the United
States think there is concrete evidence of global warming, but only 42 percent attribute the change to human activity (McGowan, 2013).
Studies show current post-secondary education may have little effect on understanding
global climate change. Sterman and Sweeney (2007) studied highly educated adults' complacency
about climate change. Participants, who were MIT graduate students, believed atmospheric C02
could be stabilized by capping emissions at or above current rates. This concept violates basic laws
of physics and supports the "wait and see" policy of many politicians (Sterman & Sweeney, 2007).
This is analogous to arguing that a swimming pool filled faster than it drains will never over flow.
Fortunately, there has been some research on effectively teaching climate change. A well-
executed study was conducted by Nam and Ito (2011) that utilized mixed-methods to determine the
impact of climate change education on undergraduates' content knowledge regarding climate
change, geologic time, as well as the relationship between climate and human history. The course
utilized active learning focused on group work and projects:
The team poster project was designed to fulfill the purpose of improving the students' information literacy in science. The project requires that students demonstrate their knowledge of climate change and human interaction using specific examples, as well as helping them critically think through the evaluation of the knowledge, and finally improving their ability to effectively communicate using scientific evidence. (Nam & Ito, 2011, p. 233)
A 19-item pre and post test was administrated at the beginning and end of the course. The
test consisted of multiple-choice items that assessed students' knowledge of climate systems and
climate change/human interactions (Nam & Ito, 2011). The content knowledge test had acceptable
internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha equaling 0.72 (Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, 2011). The
qualitative data consisted of student interviews, classroom observations, and an end of course
survey (Table 3). The qualitative results were coded into themes (Nam & Ito, 2011, p. 235):
22


1) Learning of scientific knowledge; 2) Improvement of information literacy in science; 3) Changing
attitude and environmental behavior; and 4) Satisfaction of course content, activities, and final team project.
Table 3. Qualitative questions and procedures from Nam and Ito's study (2011, p. 234-235).
Interview Questions End of Course Survev Questions Classroom Observation Procedures
What did you expect to learn about climate change before you took this class? What is the most interesting topic in this class? How do you think about the content structure of this class? What did you actually learn about climate change in terms of your expectations? How does the team project affect your ability to find and evaluate climate change information and human interaction? Give examples of how this course has changed your thinking about climate change. What do you think is the course impact on your ability to access and evaluate science information about climate change and human interactions? Questions were grouped into three categories: 1) Background information: questions regarding students' demographic background, GPA, major, related course previously taken; 2) Course evaluation: students' satisfactions about the course content, management, course support, etc.; and 3) Course impact: improvement of scientific knowledge, information literacy, and environmental behaviors as a result of taking the course. Each question was composed with sub-items that sought students' agreement about the question, which were measured using a Likert scale: 1) Scientific evidence of climate change; 2) Climate change mechanisms; 3) Temperature shift and climate change; 4) Geologic time scale; 5) Current natural disaster issues related to climate change; 6) Archaeological evidence of human history; and 7) Current political issues related to climate change. Students were asked to write their suggestions and comments for each question. In addition, questions covered students' perceptions of change in their environmental behaviors such as recycling, use of mass transportation, and energy conservation. Classroom observations were conducted at 1- or 2-week intervals. The researcher made written descriptions during the observations and tried to describe each of the following: Instructor's teaching strategy Interaction between the instructor and students Classroom climate Relevance of content knowledge to course topics and students' everyday lives.
The method utilized to teach climate change was found to be successful for two reasons (Nam & Ito, 2011): First, by presenting historical and archeological evidence of the interactions between climate change and human society; the course improved students' scientific climate
23


change knowledge and their critical thinking on evaluating the correlation between climate and human society; Second, the course impacted students' science literacy by offering students opportunities to evaluate and present their ideas about climate change and human interactions.
A previous mixed methods study by Rule and Meyer (2009), investigated high school students' understanding of global climate change and graph interpretation through similar teaching strategies as Nam and Ito (2011). The unit utilized active learning, which involved activating students' background knowledge and group work (Table 4).
Table 4. Learning methodology for the global climate change unit studied by Rule and Meyer (2009, p. 341).
Day Lesson Activity
1 Students completed the pre test of graph analysis and organism questions. They also place stickers on charts to express their views on statements related to global climate change.
2 Students worked in small groups of four students each. Each group received a plastic shoebox with 4 organism objects, four graphs, and true/false statement cards. After the activity, students checked their work with answer keys.
3 Students completed an exercise on yeast cell population, constructed a data table, plot a graph, and interpreted the results.
4 Students worked in small groups with another set of objects, graphs, and true/false statements.
5 Students watched The Eruption of Mount St Helens (Graphic Films Corporation, 1997), depicting succession in areas impacted by the eruption. This video provided students with information on ecosystems.
6 Students worked in small groups with the third set of graphs.
7 Students watched and discussed An Inconvenient Truth featuring Al Gore (Bender et al., 1997)
8 Students worked in small groups with the fourth set of graphs.
9 Students watched and discussed The Lorax by Dr. Seuss (Pratt, 1972), which describes the problems of deforestation.
10 Students completed the post test of graph analysis and organism questions. Students placed stickers on charts to express their view on global climate change.
A pre and post test were administered to examine student learning gains of climate change through graph interpretation and organism effects. A post survey was also given to understand students' affective response to the lesson. The post survey questions included the following three questions (Rule & Meyer, 2009): 1) Tell three things that you enjoyed about the global climate change activities; 2) Tell three new things that you learned from the global climate change activities; and 3) Tell three things you would change to improve the activities. One student responded with this suggestion: "I would talk about more things that will affect us" (Rule & Meyer, 2009, p. 344).
24


Table 5. Student dispositions towards five statements about global warming in Rule and Meyer's study (2009, p.345).
Statement Timing Number of Students Reporting Disposition Mean Score
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
There is a lot of scientific evidence that Earth's climate is getting warming. Pre Test 17 17 30 36 2.9
Post T est 17 9 23 51 3.1
1 believe that global warming/global climate change is happening now. Pre Test 11 12 27 50 3.2
Post T est 15 11 16 58 3.2
Global warming/climate change will not effect animals and plants much at all. Pre Test 46 22 15 17 2.0
Post T est 44 25 12 19 2.0
Global climate change will have a good effect on many animals and plants. Pre Test 31 17 18 34 2.6
Post T est 32 19 17 32 2.5
Global climate change will have a bad effect on all animals and plants. Pre Test 7 12 29 52 3.3
Post T est 20 17 20 43 2.9
Based on the qualitative results, Rule and Meyer (2009) concluded the unit was effective because of student success on the animal/plant models, graphs representing real-world data, and student expression of personal views.
Even though there were differences in these two studies, the results were similar. Rule and Meyer (2009) studied a unit taught to 100 African-American high school students in a large Northern city, while Nam and Ito (2011) studied an entire course devoted to climate change taught to 18 undergraduates at a large Midwest university. Active learning was used to teach climate change in both studies which resulted in significant statistical findings. Nam and Ito (2011) conducted hierarchical linear modeling and Rule and Meyer (2009) used a paired, two-tailed t-test. Both studies found the mean differences between pre and post test scores were statistically significant and there were significant differences between students' individual pre and post test scores. This indicates students gained some measurable climate change understanding. However, students' mean score on the post test in both studies were below proficiency and standards for passing. Rule and Meyer (2009) found students' mean post test score was 61.4 percent. Nam and Ito (2011) found the highest student score on the post test was 58 percent.
25


Additionally, Nam and Ito (2011, p. 239) found the course did not impact students'
behaviors or beliefs: "...there was little evidence of positive impacts, it is hard to say that the frequency of students' environmental behaviors change much due to the course". Neither the climate change unit nor course related the content to students' lives or impacted their behavior.
This may have translated to students' lower test scores and few changes in their beliefs or behavior. Thus, students' Climate Change Literacy did not increase. Nam and Ito (2011) specifically stated "...the course did not address specific examples of the connection to how individual life style affects the environment..." (p. 240). Simply put, the design elements used to teach climate change in these two studies (active learning) did not "work" for students despite what the statistical analysis indicated.
Research on Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior
Wachholz, Artz, Chene (2012) administered a survey to 375 students from a cross-section of disciplines and academic levels at a medium-sized university in New England. Forty-one percent identified themselves as male. The survey was designed to measure students' understanding and concern in three areas related to climate change. The first survey section focused on knowledge and attitudes (beliefs) about the causes and likely consequences of climate change. Specifically, these questions measured students' self-perceived knowledge of climate change as well as understanding of the greenhouse gas effect and ozone shield. The second section investigated students' willingness to mitigate climate change's negative impacts. The third section explored student satisfaction with the amount of climate change education they received at the university and how it could be improved. Wachholz, Artz, and Chene (2012) found that a majority (75 percent) of students believed climate change was happening and identified it as a human-induced environmental problem. This finding was also reported by Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach (2010) in their national survey of 271 young adults. Interestingly, most students in this study felt they had a moderate or
26


extensive understanding of global warming, but the vast majority did not pass the section pertaining
to climate change understanding. For example, almost all students could not differentiate the greenhouse effect from ozone depletion with 43 percent reporting the ozone hole was a major cause of climate change (Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, & Mailbach, 2010). Additionally, one in three students said there is a lot of disagreement among scientists if climate change is currently happening. Yet the students in Wachholz, Artz, and Chene's (2012) study were almost twice as likely as the participants in Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach's (2010) study to believe there is scientific consensus that climate change is currently occurring.
Although the students in Wachholz, Artz, and Chene's (2012) study were concerned about climate change, their worry did not translate into mitigation behavior. Only 15 percent had taken actions to reduced global warming and fewer than three percent were actively living a "low-carbon" lifestyle (Wachholz, Artz & Chene, 2012). This is most likely due to students' perception that climate change is a slow, distant problem unrelated to their present wellbeing. Similar results were also found by Gifford et al. (2009), who found people often believe environmental problems are worse elsewhere and in the future. Interestingly, climate change concern was highest among students with applied professional majors such as nursing, social work, and physical therapy. Concern was lowest among business majors. This coincides with the conclusions of Ewert and Becker (2001), Hodgkinson and Innes (2001), as well as Karpiak and Baril (2008).
Furthermore, concern over climate change differed by gender with over 80 percent of the female respondents very to somewhat worried about climate change (Wachholz, Artz & Chene, 2012). Slightly more than half of the male respondents expressed these levels of concern. These finding were also discovered by Bord and O'Connor (1997), Buckingham and Kulcur (2009), as well as Kellstedt et al. (2008). Each of these studies found women had greater levels of concern about environmental issues, especially with problems inherently harmful to humans.
27


Lastly, 80 percent of students who identified as liberal or somewhat liberal reported being
somewhat or very worried about climate change (Wachholz, Artz & Chene, 2012). Less than half of those identified as conservative reported these levels of concern. Furthermore, Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach (2010) found liberals tend to be less skeptical about climate change and more involved in behaviors that reduce carbon emissions. Kahan (2015) discovered that an individual who identified as "liberal" and "Democrat" had close to an 80 percent likelihood of answering climate change comprehension questions correctly on the Ordinary Science Intelligence test (OSI). Those who identified as "conservative" and "Republican" had under a 20 percent likelihood of answering correctly (Figure 3).
(1)
to
c
o
Q-
co
QJ
u
a>
o
u
O
>
-Q
03
-Q
O
*_
Cl
1st percentile 16th percentile 50th percentile 84th percentile 99th percentile 1st percentile 16th percentile 50th percentile 84th percentile 99th percentile
Ordinary Science Intelligence
Ordinary Science Intelligence
Figure 3. Political identity and science understanding (Roth, 1992, p. 12): There is "solid evidence" of recent global warming due "mostly" to "human activity such as burning fossil fuels" [agree, disagree].
Overall, these findings demonstrate that for students to change their behavior to mitigate climate change they must first believe there is reason for concern. The research indicates students have knowledge of climate change, but not a deep understanding, so their beliefs and behavior are not changed (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012; Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, & Mailbach, 2010; Gifford et al., 2009). Interestingly, students themselves recognized their need for further climate change education and even suggested experiential methods for doing so. Wachholz, Artz, and Chene
28


(2012) found 54 percent of students said there was not enough information about climate change
taught at their university. Students suggested having climate change integrated across curriculums and disciplines as well as early interventions for incoming students. Twenty-seven percent of students discussed climate change education that would employ experiential methods (like field work) to teach them how to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions. Wachholz, Artz, & Chene (2012, p. 137) state that "students seemed to yearn for knowledge that would help them become better environmental citizens and advocates for ecological change".
Research on Experiential and Place-based Education
The next step in research is to determine what teaching design elements most effectively increase students' Climate Change Literacy, which is a controversial and complex topic. I propose that students' conceptual ecology should be utilized through student-generated questions and research as well as personal experiences where students can touch anthropomorphic climate change to increase their Climate Change Literacy. These experiences will decrease students' psychological distance to climate change. Experiential Education (ExEd) and Place-based Education (PbEd) are possible teaching methods that may assist students in accommodating to higher levels of Climate Change Literacy because these education methods both utilize students' background knowledge and personal experiences (conceptual ecology). ExEd and PbEd also present opportunities for student generated questions and research. This is why ExEd and PbEd are discussed as part of this study's literature review and investigated as teaching methods that support the proposed learning design elements to increase students' Climate Change Literacy.
Experiential Education is defined as "education (the leading of students through a process of learning) that makes conscious application of the students' experiences by integrating them into the curriculum where experience involves any combination of senses, emotions..., physical condition..., and cognition" (Carver, 2008, pp. 150-151). Experiential Education requires students to use past
29


experiences and knowledge to reflect and apply understandings to future experiences. This method
follows Dewey's (1938) philosophy closely: "Hence the central problem of an education based upon experience is to select the kind of present experiences that live fruitfully and creatively in subsequent experiences". In Dewey's Theory of Experience (1938), educative experiences build from previous experiences and modify the quality of subsequent experiences to promote students' favorable growth. This is indeed linked to accommodation as discussed by Piaget as well as Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog (1982).
David Kolb and Alice Kolb built upon the work of Dewy and Piaget through their cyclical model of experiential learning as a multidimensional process (Dunlap, Dobrovolny, & Young, 2008; Efstratia, 2014). In the Experiential Learning Cycle (Kolb & Kolb, 2005), the learner first actively engages in the experience. In the second stage, the learner consciously reflects on the experience. In the third stage, the learner attempts to conceptualize a theory or model of what was observed. Lastly, the learner plans how to test the model or theory for an upcoming experience.
Active
Figure 4. The Experiential Learning Cycle and regions of the cerebral cortex (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 195).
30


In Kolb and Kolb's (2005) Experiential Learning Theory, learning is not a universal process,
but a map of learning territories composed from a continuum of learning styles. Experiential learning is a framework with many different ways of learning, which flourish and interrelate with one another. Kolb and Kolb (2005) also found "the enhancement of experiential learning in higher education can be achieved through the creation of learning spaces that promotes growth-producing experiences for learners" (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 205). Growth-producing experiences involve the following ten characteristics (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 205-210):
1. Learners feel they are part of a learning community who are known and respected by faculty
2. Learners' prior experiences are utilized and valued
3. Learners feel challenged and supported through the experience
4. Learners are given time to construct meaning through talking and listening
5. Learners develop expertise related to their life's purpose
6. Expertise means that learners not only have factual knowledge, but a conceptual framework so they can apply and transfer their understanding and skills
7. Learners are given time to reflect and test what they have learned
8. Learners connect to feelings and emotions
9. Learners link learning to interests which develops intrinsic motivation
10. Learners develop meta-cognitive skills
Such growth-producing experiences may also be used to increase students' Climate Change Literacy.
Place-based Education is education that utilizes students' different attachments to places for comprehending a range of concepts and their everyday experiences. PbEd is community focused so education becomes more relevant to the lived experiences of students, teachers, and citizens in tangible ways (Gruenewald, 2003, p. 620). "Place-based education is learning that is rooted in what
31


is localthe unique history, environment, culture, economy, literature, and art of a particular place'
(Rural School and Community Trust, 2005, p. 5). Both Place-based and Experiential Education emphasizes hands-on/minds-on, real-world learning experiences to increase academic achievement and life success. Yet Place-based Education develops stronger ties to the community and creates a heightened commitment for students to serve as contributing citizens (Sobel, 2004; Smith & Sobel, 2010).
Powers (2004) studied the use of PbEd in four elementary and middle school programs by conducting over 100 interviews with students, teachers, school staff, and administrators as well as classroom and school observations. Powers (2004) found PbEd was especially important for students with special needs and increased student motivation for learning and engagement in school. Likewise, Smith and Sobel (2010) examined a K-8 school in Portland, Oregon that utilized PbEd to immerse students in the local natural environment and to support the local community of migrant families. Students were involved in restoration and gardening projects that rooted them in their "real world", which resulted in graduates being drawn to environmental fields and political activism (Smith and Sobel, 2010).
This Study's Place in Science Education Literature
As illustrated by the above research, many studies that focus on ExEd or PbEd are solely theoretical or antidotal. I have not found a strong research study that grounds its methodology and analysis in strong conceptual frameworks. Additionally, ExEd and PbEd are not widely used in postsecondary education. Efstratia (2014) suggest this may be due to educators' lack of training, experiences, and/or funding to implement these methods/philosophies.
I hypothesize ExEd/PbEd may provide opportunities for learning design elements to increase students' Climate Change Literacy. This hypothesis is founded on the evidence that growth-based educational experiences can promote accommodation by utilizing students' conceptual ecology
32


(Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982). Utilizing students' conceptual ecology
validates their past experiences and beliefs through connections to their present and future experiences (Dewey, 1938). Therefore, ExEd/PbEd would likely be good teaching methods that allow for learning design elements that support students' climate change understanding as well as shift their beliefs and behavior towards mitigating climate change. This would thereby increase students' Climate Change Literacy. To test this hypothesis, I utilized my conceptual model (Figure 2) discussed earlier. Essentially, ExEd/PbEd has the propensity needed to drive students towards accommodation through personal experience. This is where my pilot study fits within science education literature.
33


CHAPTER III
PILOT STUDY Methods
Overview and Research Design
I conducted a mixed methods study to address the research question: What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? This study is the preliminary data collection to investigate what design elements promote Climate Change Literacy and to inform the development of a conceptual model to direct future course design. This study investigated a sustainable urban agriculture field course (Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I) at the University of Colorado Denver, a public urban university. The field course was conducted at an urban farm and included guest speakers with related hands-on activities. The course culminated with each student completing an independent research project to evaluate and improve current planning at the farm or in the students' community. A complex sequence of ExEd/PbEd activities was designed with the intended outcome of changing students' understanding and dispositions. This study examined the research question by:
1. Measuring the growth (if any) of students' Climate Change Literacy; and
2. Examining why shifts do or do not occur in students' climate change beliefs and/or behavior.
This course was selected because it was a primarily undergraduate course that employed true ExEd/PbEd that involved the causes and consequences of climate change.
34


The quantitative aspect of the study measured any changes in students' understanding,
beliefs, and self-reported behaviors regarding climate change as a pre/post concept test and survey. The pre and post test was designed to determine if student understanding was due to accommodation caused by utilizing students' conceptual ecology. The test results enabled me to describe students' conceptual ecology in terms of possible conceptual shifts in their understanding. The pre and post survey identified if students shifted their affective climate change beliefs and/or behavior as well as why. The survey also helped determine the impact of students generating their own questions and investigating the answers.
The qualitative aspect of this study utilized a focus group and in-person interviews to examine students' experiences, understandings, and perceptions of beliefs and behavioral shifts. These interviews were developed into mini case studies. In addition, course observations from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. were conducted every Friday September 4ththrough December 11th, 2015. Course observations were recorded in a semi-structured narrative approach (Evertson & Green, 1995).
All these instruments discussed above measured students' competency in Climate Change Literacy before and after the course to investigate what learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education. This pilot study also helped refine my conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy in future courses.
Setting: Course Description and Location
Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I focused on invasive species, water in the West, land conservation, government management assistance, sustainable grazing in arid areas, ecosystem integration for agriculture, and soil health. The specific course description is the following (the course syllabus is also included in the Appendix, Figure A10):
35


Students will study topics such as long term farm planning, range management, native/invasive species, water distribution, interaction with the local government, selling in local markets, urban animal husbandry, community relations, four-season harvests, agricultural conservation easements, farm land conservation, water, and other issues of farming in the urban environment. As the last of the summer harvest is picked, fall is a great time for understanding the farm as an important part of the larger urban context. This field study course (held at the farm) ...will culminate with each student performing an independent research project to evaluate and improve on current planning at the farm. (Weaver, 2015, p.l)
The course included expert discussions as well as field study where students practiced and applied the above topics. Students also reflected on their learning. As the participants interacted with the farm and guest speakers, they worked in groups to accomplish tasks on the farm such as planting and harvesting sorghum, a drought resistant food stable. Participants grew to trust one another and a community of learners was grown on the farm as well as vegetables. Thus, this course extensively utilized ExEd/PbEd. However, the objectives did not specifically address climate change, but it was deeply imbedded in all the topics that made up the objectives:
1. Create a general understanding of the complex of the issues of an urban farm.
2. Experience the levels of city, county, and national infrastructure that affect urban production spaces.
3. Independently review the planning, structure, and interaction of specific systems at the farm.
4. Understand how the [farm] functions interactively with the local urban environment. (Weaver, 2015, p.l)
The specific topics discussed in the course are presented in Figure 5. During each class students interacted with a guest speaker and participated in a hands-on project at or near the urban farm that often involved the students' community. For example, students walked the local ditch the farm has water rights to, which is located on property. Students discussed how drought and floods impact water rights and the consequences on the farm's water allocation (week five). On November 8th, students discussed local water rights with Scott Cuthbertson from the Colorado Water
36


Commission. Students then hiked or walked the Cherry Creek Trail investigating how their community accesses water. On weeks ten and eleven students learned about land conservation and small acreage management. To help illustrate and apply these concepts, students walked the farm's goats to open space for free browsing in order to combat evasive weeds without the use of pesticides. Students discussed how to apply these principles to their own property. Even though the objectives for these activities did not specifically include increasing students' Climate Change Literacy, students discussed increased drought severity, flood frequency, and over population of invasive species, which are all direct outcomes of climate change.
Week 1: Introduction: long term urban farm planning (Aug 23) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 2: UCD Photo Shoot/ Long Term Planning (Aug 30) Mapping the farm
Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 3: Invasive Weeds
(Sept 6) Reading: Understanding the survey of thefarm/Five Acres
Speaker: Margaret Paget, Invasive week specialist, city of Wheat Ridge Week 4: Range Management/ Understanding the land (Sept 13) Reading: Chapters from: The Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 5: Microclimate, drought and long term climate.
(Sept 20) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life
Speaker: Fred Chambers, Department of Geography UCD Week 6: Water allocation: storm water, fresh water, sewage, and flood plains (Sept 27) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: no speaker Week 7: Urban animal husbandry
(Oct 4) Reading: Animal Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lisa Sholton and Curtis Utley, JeffCo Extension Week 8: Topic: Planning for four season growth and sales in local markets (Oct 11) Reading: please check out Colorado Market Maker Speaker: Balancing a farm budget Week 9: Interaction with local government: county/state (Oct 18) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life
Speaker: Kaitlin Fischer, Jefferson County Conservation District Week 10: Farm Land Conservation
(Oct 25) Reading: reading/understanding the farm's conservation easement Speaker: Amanda Nims, Colorado Open Lands Week 11: Small Acreage Management
(Nov 1) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life
Speaker: Jennifer Cook, CSU Extension agent, Adams County Week 12: Water rights and farming in the state of Colorado
(Nov 8) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: Scott Cuthbertson, Colorado Water Commission Week 13: Interaction with local government: city (Nov 15) Reading: Chapters from: Local Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lauren Mikulak, Planner, City of Wheat Ridge Week 14: Topic: TBD
(Nov 22) Reading: Project: building/preparing cold frames Weeks 15 and 16 (Nov 29): Student presentations
Figure 5. Course schedule of specific topics, readings, and guest speakers.
37


The urban farm sits on over ten acres of land located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado and has a
rich history of supporting Metro Denver with local and natural farm-to-table goods and services (such as goat weed control). The urban farm is also now used as an educational setting for students and community alike to explore sustainable urban agriculture.
Figure 6. The urban farm house in Wheat Ridge, Colorado that served as the classroom (Weaver, 2016).
Figure 7. The urban farm's wetlands and fields that served as research sites for much of the course (Marzetta, 2016).
38


Participants
The participants were undergraduate and graduate students from the University of Colorado Denver who enrolled in the course (a convenience sample). At the beginning of the course, after IRB approval was awarded (Appendix Figure All), students were asked to participate (Appendix Figure A12). Their decision did not impact their course grade in any way. Also, participation in the study was voluntary, confidential, and written consent was collected from participants.
In general, students at the University of Colorado Denver are 55 percent female and 39 percent members of minority groups. The average high school GPA of students at the University of Colorado Denver is 3.4 ("The University by the Numbers", 2014). The specific demographics of the participants in this study are listed in Table 6. Typically, there are approximately 30 students that enroll in the course, but only eight students enrolled the semester when the study was conducted. Yet, there was a 100 percent response rate among participants for the pre/post survey and test as well as focus group. Flowever, only two participants consented to be interviewed.
Table 6. Self-reported participant demographics and descriptive statistics.
Participant Race/Ethnicity (n=8) Gender F=Female M=Male (n=8) Age in years (n=7) Approximate Yearly Family Income in 1,000s of dollars (n =7) Major and Minor (n=7)
1 Asian F 32 70 BS, Major: Environmental Science
2 Caucasian F 25 140 BA, Major: Chemistry, Minor: Education MS, Major: Environmental Science, Minor: Water Quality
3 White M 29 30 BS, Major: Mechanical Engineering, Minor: Geography
4 White F 22 30 BA, Major: History and Education, Minor: Geography
5 White M 28 40 BS, Major: Biology, Minor: Geography
6 White M 26 15 BS, Major: Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning
7 White F 22 70 BA, Major: Public Health, Minor: Sustainability
8 Sudanese F
% or Mean/SD 25% members of a minority group 63% Female Mean=26.29 SD=3.41 Mean=56.43 SD=39.16 57% BS (pursuing),43% BA (have or pursuing); 14% MS (pursuing) 100% STEM Major and/or Minor
39


Quantitative Data Instruments and Collection
A pre and post Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey (CCBBS) was administered at the beginning and end of the course to determine any change in students' perception of their climate change understanding as well as their beliefs and behavior surrounding climate change mitigation. Essentially, the CCBBS tested participants' change in belief and behavior (Appendix Figure A7). General question topics are listed in Table 7. The pre and post CCBBS both had 20 closed items and 10 open items. Questions were designed to provide data related to this study's hypothesis and were composed of items from existing peer-reviewed climate change beliefs and behavior surveys. The peer-reviewed surveys used included the climate change understanding, beliefs, and behavior student survey by Wachholz, Artz, and Chene (2012) as well as climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs survey by Markowitz (2012). Please see the Appendix Figures A1-A2 for the surveys utilized. The pre CCBBS only differed from the post regarding the questions posed about the course. The CCBBS took approximately 15 minutes to complete. The participants' responses were recorded in an excel data sheet for analysis.
Table 7. General questions posed to participants in the CCBBS and purpose for asking them. (*Some post survey items differed from pre survey items as participants did not have any course experience when the pre survey was administered.)
General Question Topic Purpose for Asking Question
What causes climate change? Climate Change Understanding
Do humans impact climate change? Climate Change Understanding
How do you know the previous 2 answers? Climate Change Understanding
Did the course help you to better understand Climate Change? Please explain your answer. *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred
Did the course recognize and use your previous knowledge and experiences? *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred (focus on accommodation through students' conceptual ecology)
Did generating your own questions and research help you to better understand climate change? *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred (focus on students generating their own questions and research)
40


To determine if ExEd/PbEd impacted students' climate change understanding, a pre and
post climate change concept test (CCCT) was administered. Essentially, the CCT measured change in understanding (Appendix Figure A8). The CCCT is a combination of the carbon cycle 2011 concept inventory (Hartley et al., 2011), climate change cultural conceptual questions by Crona, Wutich, Brewis, and Gartin (2013), as well as climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs survey by Markowitz (2012). The CCCT contained 37 closed items and 10 open items. Information from the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) and Carnegie Mellon University on global warming (Hassol, 2002) was also utilized to develop questions. Please see Appendix Figures A3-A6 for the concept tests utilized. Questions were selected or created that would demonstrate students' climate change understanding, especially focusing on common alternative conceptions based on misinformation. These resources have been proven to reliably demonstrate student climate change understanding by their respective authors. The CCCT is a mix of true/false, multiple choice, and short answer essay questions about climate change. The CCCT takes about 20 minutes to complete and the pre/post tests were identical. Student demographic variables were also explored to help explain scores. Student demographic variables include major, age, gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status. Qualitative Data Instruments and Collection
In-person participant interviews were conducted to examine in detail participants' responses to the surveys. This helped construct the case studies to examine possible reasons why (or why not) students shifted their beliefs and/or behavior. The interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes and were only conducted with two consenting participants. The interviews were conducted in my office to ensure privacy. Interview topics included the participants' experiences in the course, their climate change understandings, and their belief as well as behavior surrounding climate change mitigation. Specific questions were determined by students' responses on the CCBBS and
41


CCCT. Please see the interview guide in the Appendix Figure A9 for more details. The interviews were audio recorded and verbatim transcriptions were created in an Excel data sheet for analysis. These interviews became the mini case studies because of the small sample.
A focus group was conducted during the course to uncover factors that influenced participants' opinions, behavior and/or motivation regarding ExEd and PbEd (Krueger & Casey, 2015, p. 21). A focus group was utilized because I was looking for a range of opinions, ideas, and feelings about these teaching methods. Due to the small class size, all of the participants were included in the focus group. Participants were asked what type of teaching methods they preferred to learn science concepts with and why. Participants were also asked if they would take another course that utilized intensive field methods. Participants were not led to any particular conclusion and the terms ExEd and PbEd were not mentioned in the questioning. The focus group was conducted with an open format and there was no specific protocol.
The course observations were recorded in a semi-structured narrative approach as described by Evertson and Green (1995). I took observation field notes that included the date/time, focus, context description, running description, and comments. The observations documented ExEd/PbEd, learning design elements, as well as students' actions and reactions. Verbatim transcriptions of the observations were created for analysis in an Excel data sheet.
Observation Field Notes Observer: Date:
Focus:
Context Description:
Time Running Description Comments
Figure 8. Observation field notes format (Evertson & Green, 1995).
42


Quantitative Data Analysis
In order to determine if there was a statistically significant difference between participants' pre and post CCBBS and CCCT, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted. According to Leech, Barrett, and Morgan (2011), this test is a non-parametric (distribution-free) alternative to the paired sample t-test. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test is conducted when data is not normally distributed or the distribution is unknown. Thus, the Wilcoxon statistical test does not make assumptions about population distribution. Instead, the test ranks the data from low to high and then analyzes the ranks. The test is based solely on the order in which the observations from the two samples fall. Due to the small sample size, the data was not normally distributed. This was confirmed by calculating the data's skewness values (please see Chapter IV: Results). The other assumptions for this test, which this study meets, are the following: 1) Data were paired and came from the same population, 2) Each pair was chosen randomly and independently, and 3) The data was measured on an ordinal scale and were not nominal. The pre/post CCBBS and CCCT were analyzed separately by item and by participants' aggregate score using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. These analyses helped to demonstrate any growth on each item and participants' growth in total score.
Qualitative Data Analysis
Open response survey questions as well as interviews and the focus group transcripts were analyzed using coding in relation to the research question. To increase rigor and trustworthiness of the findings, two analytic procedures were conducted: constant comparison analysis using both deductive and inductive techniques (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Constant comparison analysis using deductive techniques involved identifying themes in the data (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2011) such as competency indicators of Climate Change Literacy. First priori codes based on the research question were used for the deductive comparison. Then the constant comparison analysis using inductive
43


techniques was performed. During this second round of coding, themes and patterns relating to the research purposes were allowed to emerge from the data rather than searching for specific codes (Patton, 2002).
Mixed Methods Triangulation Analysis
Lastly, the three qualitative data were triangulated with the quantitative data. According to Greene, Caracelli, & Graham (1998), triangulation strengthens the validity of findings because multiple methods offset or counteract biases to assess the same phenomenon more accurately. This was especially important for the mini case studies derived from the interviews.
Methods' Purpose
The purpose of this methodology was to investigate what learning design elements are
suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and to inform the
development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy. This
research was aimed as ascertaining if utilizing students' conceptual ecology promoted an increase in
students' Climate Change Literacy. Shifts in students' beliefs and behavior towards mitigating
climate change would indicate they can apply their science understanding regarding climate change.
Consequently, the psychological distance between students and this environmental risk would have
been reduced. Thus, it may be inferred that students better understand the personal risks
associated with climate change and see it as a human induced ethical issue. Shifts in conceptual and
behavioral outcomes towards mitigating climate change would indicate students have a more
complex understanding of the science surrounding climate change. This would possibly indicate an
increase in students' Climate Change Literacy, which is an essential part of Environmental Literacy.
When education has environmental relevance for students, when students become convinced of the consequences of their actions, when they value what they are in danger of losing, then Environmental Literacy may be realized. (Rockcastle, 1989, p. 22)
44


Pilot Results
To address the research question, What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy?, I gathered and analyzed information from the pilot study. This helped to identify design elements that promoted Climate Change Literacy and thus develop a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy. I first analyzed any growth in students' Climate Change Literacy by performing statistical tests on the pre/post CCBBS and CCCT as well as coding the CCBBS' open response items.
CCBBS Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test
Descriptive statistics were run on each closed response question, which included the mean and skewness. The skewness was calculated for each closed response question to determine if the dependent variable was normally distributed. If the absolute value of the skewness is less than the absolute value of one, the variable is at least approximately normal. In 18 of the 44 pre and post questions (~41 percent) the skewness was less than the absolute value of one (skewness values less than 111 are bolded in Table 8). To determine if there was a statistically significant difference between participants' pre and post CCBBS, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted for each question pair since not all the questions had a normal distribution as indicated by the skewness values. The following table lists the mean, skewness value, negative/positive ranks, z value for the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and significance for each question pair. The only item that did not have any ranking ties for question 19, / reduce my use of motor vehicles, with five participants decreasing their use of vehicles and two increasing their use. Ideally, on the post survey participants should have decreased their rank to reflect an increase in Climate Change Literacy on all questions except 21.1 and 22. There was a decrease in rank on ten questions indicating an increase in Climate Change
45


Literacy on those items (highlighted below in Table 8). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test did not
indicate a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response survey questions
where p < 0.05. Since a significant difference was not found, the effect sizes were not calculated for
any question pair.
Table 8. CCBBS statistics (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05 level).
Question Mean Skew- ness Ranks (n = 7) Z value P

Q Pre 1 1.000 2.828 - =0 + = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 1 1.125 ___
Q Pre 2 1.286 1.230 - =0 + = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 2 1.375 .644
Q Pre 3 1.286 2.646 - = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 3 1.000 ___ + =0
Q Pre 4 1.286 2.646 - = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 4 1.000 ___ + =0
Q Pre 5 1.714 2.347 - =2 + =2 -.378 .705
Q Post 5 1.500 1.323
Q Pre 7 1.714 1.784 - =2 -.816 .414
Q Post 7 1.375 1.951 + = 1
Q Pre 9.1 1.143 2.646 - =0 + = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 9.1 1.250 1.440
Q Pre 9.2 1.143 2.646 - =0 + =2 -1.342 .180
Q Post 9.2 1.625 1.960
Q Pre 9.3 1.143 2.646 - =0 + =2 -1.414 .157
Q Post 9.3 1.375 .644
Q Pre 10 2.167 -.313 - = 1 -1.000 .317
Q Post 10 1.875 .068 + =0
Q Pre 11 2.286 .249 - =4 -1.414 .157
Q Post 11 1.500 .000 + = 1
Question Mean Skew- ness Ranks (n = 7) Z value P

Q Pre 12 1.857 .374 - = 2 -.816 .414
Q Post 12 2.125 1.966 + = 1
Q Pre 13 1.429 .374 - =0 -1.414 .157
Q Post 13 1.750 .404 + =2
Q Pre 14 2.429 .374 - = 1 .000 1.00
Q Post 14 2.375 .644 + = 1 0
Q Pre 15 1.714 -1.123 - = 1 -.577 .564
Q Post 15 1.875 -2.828 + =2
Q Pre 16 2.429 .277 - = 3 -1.732 .083
Q Post 16 2.000 .000 + =0
Q Pre 17 1.429 .374 - = 1 -.577 .564
Q Post 17 1.625 .824 + =2
Q Pre 18 2.143 -.174 - = 3 -1.300 .194
Q Post 18 1.625 .824 + = 1
Q Pre 19 2.286 .249 - =5 -1.127 .260
Q Post 19 1.675 .824 + =2
Q Pre 20 2.500 .000 - =2 -1.414 .157
Q Post 20 2.375 -.824 + =0
Q Pre 21.1 2.857 -.414 - = 2 -.378 .705
Q Post 21.1 2.875 .277 + =2
Q Pre 22 3.857 -2.646 - =4 -1.841 .066
Q Post 22 2.875 -.623 + =0
CCBBS Analysis: Coding of Open Response Items
Open response survey questions were analyzed using coding in relation to the research question. Table 9 describes the codes (themes) that were used in coding participants' open survey responses. First priori codes based on the research question were used for the deductive comparison. The second round of constant comparison analysis was performed using inductive techniques where themes and patterns relating to the research purposes were allowed to emerge (Patton, 2002). Participants' open responses are included in Appendix Table A2.
46


In question 6 (Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change?), one
participant shifted from believing climate change is a natural process to believing it is an anthropomorphically induced issue. In the post survey, four participants acknowledged that taking action to mitigate climate change is a difficult endeavor, but felt they were obligated to do so for future generations. Three participants still realized they are contributing to climate change and it is their responsibility to help mitigate the issue, but did not focus on their own gains. In response to question 8.1 (What do you consider to be the top three impacts of climate change?), seven participants discussed the causes of climate change instead of the impacts of it.
When participants were asked, If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? (question 8.2), their responses shifted from resource and marine impacts as well as a general negative influences on future generations to discussing increased land temperatures, specific ecosystem impacts. Participants also discussed increases in natural disasters as well as human disease/suffering.
For question 21.2, participants stated on the pre CCBBS they needed more information on new technology, affordable sustainability, and general science content knowledge. On the post CCBBS students commented they required more information on new laws and policies as well as ecosystem services and mitigation. Participants commented they would like more information of opportunities for community and social involvement on both the pre and post CCBBS.
Participants only responded to questions 23 through 28 in the post CCBBS as the questions examined their experiences in the course. For question 23, (Did the course help you to better understand climate change?), all participants responded "yes". Four participants stated the course helped them to understand climate change's impact on agriculture. Four participants also stated the
47


course provided them greater local perspective and detailed answers to their personal questions.
Three participants also commented the course helped them to better understand the impact of climate change locally and the influences of their community on climate.
When participants were asked, Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experiences? (question 24), all stated, "Yes". Five participants responded the course utilized their pervious knowledge and experiences by supporting their critical thinking and greater/deeper learning. Two participants acknowledged they applied their pervious comprehensions to current environmental and agricultural issues.
For question 25 (Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change?), six participants found creating their own research question helped them to discover connections between climate change and human development, biochemistry, as well as green food production. Two participants stated by creating their own research questions they learned about issues not covered in other courses.
Of the participants that responded to question 26 (Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change?), four commented that conducting their own research to answer their questions helped them better understand climate change. This occurred when participants found connections between climate change and water quality as well as self-sustainability. One participant stated the course helped to guide their personal interests and life journey.
When participants were asked, How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change? (question 27), four responded they wanted more information on climate change. Two participants commented they would like more learning on the connection between climate change and agriculture. Another participant requested more field trips and time together as a class.
48


Table 9. Coding of open responses for the pre and post CCBBS. (Not all participants responded; some responses contained multiple codes.
Question Code/Theme # in Pre # in Post
6. Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? Please explain. Yes, otherwise 1 am contributing to it/personal responsibility 3 3
Yes, my career 1 0
Yes, obligation to future generation 1 3
Yes, obligation to the environment 1 1
Yes, taking action but difficult 0 1
No, natural process 1 0
8.1. What do you considerto be thetop three impacts of climate change? Please list. Environmental imDacts of Climate Change: increased temps/severe weather, higher sea levels, etc. 3 1
Human focused impacts of Climate Change: challenges for agriculture, etc. 1 0
Causes of Climate Change 3 7
8.2. If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Please explain. Resource (food/water in general) impacts 4 1
Ocean (biotic/abiotic marine) Impacts 2 1
Ecosystem (biotic/abiotic land) Impacts 1 3
Temperature increase 0 1
Increased natural disasters 0 2
Impact future generations 3 0
Increase in human disease/decrease in human health 0 2
Increase in human suffering (in general) 0 1
21.2. If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful? New technology 1 0
New laws/policy 0 1
Affordable sustainability 1 0
Opportunities for community/social involvement 1 1
Science content knowledge 1 0
Ecosystem services/mitigation 0 1
23. Did the course help you to better understand climate change? Please explain. Yes, impact of climate change NA 2
Yes, community influences NA 1
Yes, impact on agriculture NA 4
Yes, provided greater local perspective/detailsto answer personal questions NA 4
24. Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experiences? Please explain. Yes, supported critical thinking, greater/deeper learning NA 5
Yes, applied previous knowledge to environmental/agricultural issues NA 2
25. Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change? Please explain. Yes, connection between human development and climate change NA 2
Yes, connection between chemistry and climate change NA 1
Yes, connection between green food and climate change NA 1
Yes, learned about issues not addressed in other courses NA 2
26. Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change? Yes, helped guided my interests/personal journey NA 2
Yes, connection between climate change and water quality NA 1
Yes, self-sustainability NA 1
27. How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change? More on climate change NA 4
More learning around the connection between climate change and agriculture NA 2
More field trips/time together NA 1
28. How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change? More information on efficiency in land/water/energy use NA 1
Howto reduce their carbon footprint through everyday activities NA 2
Increased awareness of resource consumption NA 2
More information on climate change NA 1


For question 28 (How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of
climate change?), participants commented they wanted more information on efficiencies in land, water, and energy, as well as how to reduce their carbon footprint. Participants also stated they would like more information on climate change. One participant even mentioned desiring an increased awareness of resource consumption for themselves and others.
CCCT Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test
Descriptive statistics were conducted for each closed response question, which included the mean and skewness. The skewness was calculated for each closed response question to determine if the dependent variable was normally distributed. If the absolute value of the skewness is less than the absolute value of one, the variable is at least approximately normal. In 14 of the 74 pre and post questions (~19 percent) the skewness was less than the absolute value of one (skewness values less than 111 are bolded in Table 10 and 11). To determine if there was a statistically significant difference between participants' pre and post CCCT, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted for each question pair since not all the questions had a normal distribution. The statistical test was calculated for each closed response question pair to determine if a significant difference was present in any of the questions posed to participants. The following tables list the mean, skewness value, z value for the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and significance for each question pair. None of the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests indicated a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response CCCT questions where p < 0.05. Since a significant difference was not found, the effect sizes were not
calculated for any question pair.


Table 10. CCCT statistics for questions 1.1-20.a (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05. level).
Question Mean Skewness Z value P

QPre 1.1 1.167 2.449 .000 1.000
Q Post 1.1 1.167 2.449
QPre 1.2 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 1.2 1.000
QPre 1.3 1.000 -1.000 .317
QPre 1.3 1.167 2.449
QPre 1.4 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 1.4 1.167 2.449
QPre 1.5 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 1.5 1.167 2.449
QPre 1.6 1.333 .968 .000 1.000
Q Post 1.6 1.500 .000
QPre 2 3.333 .968 -1.342 .180
Q Post 2 3.000 .000
QPre 3.1 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 3.1 1.000
QPre 4.1 1.286 1.230 -1.414 .157
Q Post 4.1 1.000
QPre 6 1.286 1.230 -1.000 .317
Q Post 6 1.125 2.828
QPre 7.1 1.143 2.646 .000 1.000
Q Post 7.1 1.125 2.828
QPre 8 1.429 .374 -.577 .564
Q Post 8 1.500 .000
QPre 9 1.000 -1.000 .317
Q Post 9 1.250 1.440
Q Pre 10 1.143 2.646 .000 1.000
Q Post 10 1.143 2.646
QPre 11 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 11 1.000
QPre 12 1.286 1.230 -1.414 .157
Q Post 12 1.571 -.374
QPre 13 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 13 1.000
Q Pre 14 2.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 14 2.000
QPre 15 2.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 15 2.000
QPre 16 2.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 16 2.000
QPre 17 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 17 1.000
QPre 18 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 18 1.000
QPre 19 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 19 1.000
QPre 20.a 1.286 1.230 -1.414 .157
Q Post 20.a 1.625 -.644
51


Table 11. CCCT statistics for questions 21.1-33 (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05. level).
Question Mean Skewness Z value P

Q Pre 21.1 1.143 2.646 -1.000 .317
Q Post 21.1 1.000
Q Pre 22.1 1.143 2.646 -1.000 .317
Q Post 22.1 1.000
Q Pre 23 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 23 1.000
Q Pre 24.1 1.571 -.374 .000 1.000
Q Post 24.1 1.625 -.644
Q Pre 25.1 1.667 -.968 -1.000 .317
Q Post 25.1 1.714 -1.230
Q Pre 26 1.000 .000 1.000
Q Post 26 1.000
Q Pre 27 1.847 -2.646 -.577 .564
Q Post 27 1.750 -1.440
Q Pre 28 1.714 -1.230 .000 1.000
Q Post 28 1.625 -.644
Q Pre 29 1.167 2.449 -1.000 .317
Q Post 29 1.000
Q Pre 30 1.333 .968 -1.414 .157
Q Post 30 1.000
Q Pre 31 2.000 -1.000 .317
Q Post 31 1.875 -2.828
Q Pre 32 1.167 2.449 -1.000 .317
Q Post 32 1.000
Q Pre 33 1.667 -.968 -1.414 .157
Q Post 33 2.000
Comparing Assessments and Aggregated Scores
To determine if there was a statistically significant difference between participants' percent of correct responses (overall aggregated score) on the pre/post CCBBS and CCCT, the Wilcoxon singed-rank test was conducted on each assessment separately. The following table lists the mean, skewness value, z value for the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and significance for each instrument. As the table below illustrates, a statistically significant difference was not found.
52


Table 12. Participants' overall aggregated score statistics for the CCBBS and CCCT (n=7; significance
at the p < 0.05 level).
Instrument Mean Skewness Z value P
Pre CCBBS 51.29 -.735 .000 1.000
Post CCBBS 51.50 .854
Pre CCCT 62.71 -1.161 -1.524 .128
Post CCCT 67.75 -.617
These results were utilized as background to support the model development. The above quantitative results were encouraging, but inconclusive evidence on their own. I next examined why shifts did or did not occur in students' climate change beliefs and/or behavior. Specifically, mini case studies of one student who shifted their beliefs and behaviors a great deal and one who shifted very little were analyzed. Since the mini case studies are detailed discussions composed of participant interviews, focus group insights, and course observations, the results from these methods as well as the mini case studies are presented in CHAPTER IV: Discussion of Pilot Results.
53


CHAPTER IV
A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY COURSE DESIGN
After investigating learning design elements suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy,
the pilot results informed the development of a conceptual model to improve course design for teaching Climate Change Literacy. The following discusses the pilot study's results, limitations, and conclusions that informed this conceptual model, which was revised from the initial model to incorporate the study's findings.
Discussion of Pilot Results
This study's research question, What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy?, was explored through both quantitative and qualitative data. This gave me the unique opportunity of telling the story of what design elements encouraged participants' Climate Change Literacy from their own words.
CCBBS
When the CCBBS was analyzed, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated there was not a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response survey questions where p <
0.05. This is also illustrated with only one item (question 19) having no tied rankings between pre and post CCBBS. This quantitative analysis paints a bleak portrait of how design elements facilitated by ExEd and PbEd promote students' Climate Change Literacy. However, the portrait is only half-complete. The qualitative analyses of the CCBBS' open-ended responses tell a very different story between pre and post instrument:
When participants were asked, Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change?, one participant shifted from believing climate change is a natural process to believing it is an anthropomorphically induced issue:
54


Pre CCBBS: "Climate change may be occurring, but the world is currently in the thawing process from the last glacial period" (Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015).
Post CCBBS: "Yes, to decrease my carbon footprint" (Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015).
The ability of the course to induce this incredible conceptual shift is indeed promising as this student
increased their Climate Change Literacy from pre-nominal to functional. This outcome also mirrors
the findings of Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon (2012) as the belief that climate change is
anthropogenically caused is necessary for realizing personal actions can mitigate climate change.
This participant realized their carbon footprint was in part responsible for climate change and,
therefore, had a personal responsibility to help mitigate it.
Additionally, all the other participants already felt they had a moral obligation to respond to
climate change, and their belief did not change. This was reflected in results showing no statistically
significant difference when the CCBBS data was analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
However, in the post CCBBS four participants acknowledge taking action to mitigate climate change
is a difficult endeavor, but felt obligated to do so for future generations. This realization reflects an
increase from functional to operational Climate Change Literacy:
I feel I need to do my part in taking actions such as recycling, conserving energy, trying to use less. But it is still hard to completely cut out driving especially in areas where there is no good public transportation. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
When participants were asked, If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change,
how serious of a problem do you think it will be?, five participants' responses shifted from resource
and marine impacts as well as a general negative influences on future generations to specific
ecosystem impacts, increases in natural disasters and human disease/suffering. One participant
stated, "Serious. Probably our grandchildren's lives with change drastically" (Participant Two,
personal communication, fall, 2015). Another participant commented, "Super serious you guys.
Food and water shortage, rising sea levels, etc." (Participant Six, personal communication, fall,
55


2015). Participant responses on the post CCBBS were more detailed and reflected higher levels of
ecological concepts such as carrying capacity {K). The five participants realized how future generations would be impacted (increased natural disasters, diseases) and were more empathetic to both humans and the natural environment: "We are reaching our earth's carrying capacity FAST. Natural disasters will increase... humans will suffer as well as animals and ecosystems will fall apart" (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015). This reflected a shift in participants' beliefs to operational Climate Change Literacy as their perception moved from present to future, from society to humanity, and from isolated phenomena to interacting systems (Table 2). Essentially, participants' understanding and beliefs surrounding the consequences of global climate change shifted from isolated ecosystem impacts (i.e., water shortage) to how systems work together (i.e., how water shortage leads to disease).
When asked, If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful?, participants (n = 4) stated on the pre CCBBS they needed more information on general science content knowledge and new technology. Participants wanted to know how they could personally benefit from such advances. However, on the post CCBBS participants (n = 4) felt more certain of their science content knowledge and did not discuss being interested in how they could benefit. They were also confident in their ability address climate change personally. One participant wrote on the pre CCBBS, "Any new technology and advancement that I may not know and can be beneficial to me" (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015). A participant commented on the post CCBBS, "Always learning... Information and learning is ongoing, but I feel very well equipped to address climate change in my own life" (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015). This reflected participants' (n = 4) shift to operational levels of Climate Change Literacy through participants' willingness to take personal responsibility for climate change impacts (Figure 2). Participants demonstrated a shift from self-preservation to environmental preservation.
56


Interestingly, participants were concerned about being involved with environmental opportunities
and social movements on both the pre and post CCBBS. Did this openness for helping the environment impact their growth in Climate Change Literacy outside the course? However, these changes were also seen in Participant 3, who completely shifted his understanding and beliefs.
Yet why did participants' understandings and beliefs shift? Was the shift due to the course? When asked, Did the course help you to better understand climate change?, all participants that responded (n = 6) agreed the course assisted them in deepening their climate change understanding:
I was already aware of topics involving climate change before this class, but it put more things in perspective and cleared some questions I was pondering. It was helpful to know about what impacts climate change causes and the community knowledge or lack of information around urban agricultural. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
[The course] also provided me with important ways to grow my own food, be aware of complexities of the agricultural system, and be more aware and in touch with our land. (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015)
To understand what learning design elements deepened participants' understanding, I looked at
participant responses to the following three questions:
1. Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experience?
2. Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change?
3. Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change?
All participants that responded (n = 6) stated the course utilized their previous knowledge and/or experiences. One participant commented, "It [the course] let me think critically involving my previous knowledge and apply it to issues around land, water, agriculture and the environment" (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015). This response documented the course was accessing participants' conceptual ecology (Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982). However, did
57


utilizing students' conceptual ecology lead to their accommodation of new science understandings,
beliefs, and behavior? For seven participants, their understandings and beliefs shifted to a higher level of Climate Change Literacy, but radical accommodation was not seen as participants were already at the functional level of Climate Change Literacy. Yet, one participant did experience a radical accommodation from believing climate change was as a natural process to understanding it as an anthropomorphically induced issue.
Participants (n = 5) also reported creating their own research question and investigating the answer helped them to better understand climate change. One participant explained how their research question and investigation lead them to a deeper understand of climate change: "My research on dissolved organic carbon in the water supply has everything to do with climate change, with concentrations increasing [in relation to] climate change" (Participant Two, personal communication, fall, 2015). Another participant indicated her/his climate change understanding increased when s/he researched a self-selected question. More importantly the self-driven research helped the participant to find opportunities to sustainably support her/his self. Simply put, the participant found connections to their "real" life: "By building a greenhouse it addressed the fact that local food may not be attainable any other way than growing...It helped me look at what I could do to support myself" (Participant Four, personal communication, fall, 2015). When participants created their own research question and investigated the answer, participants' spatial, temporal, and social distance to climate change decreased. This assisted participants in reaching higher levels of Climate Change Literacy, which was in agreement with Liberman and Trope's (2008) Construal Level Theory.
Lastly, participants were asked to critique the course in regarding to learning about climate change and howto mitigate it:
58


1. How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change?
2. How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change? Overall, participants (n = 6) liked the experiential nature of the course: "I learned a lot of new things about conservation and ecology being tied to urban agriculture (organic farming)" (Participant One, personal commination, fall, 2015). However, one participant also commented, "I would like to see more being tied to climate change" (Participant One, personal commination, fall, 2015). The course objectives did not include climate change, so this criticism is understandable. Participants felt the course connected climate change to urban agriculture and taught them conservation techniques they could personally apply: "This course already goes over valuable conservation methods in urban agriculture, I felt it was well put in that aspect" (Participant One, personal commination, fall, 2015). Although, participants (n = 6) still hungered for more information regarding efficiency in land, water, and energy conservation. They also requested more ways to reduce their carbon footprint through everyday activities and being more aware of resource consumption. Additionally, participants desired even more information on climate change. For example one participant stated, "Have every lecture on or relate to climate change" (Participant Eight, personal commination, fall, 2015). These findings coincide with those of Wachholz, Artz, & Chene (2012) who found students "yearned" for knowledge to become agents of ecological change.
Yet, did this hands-on learning that led to an increase in participants' Climate Change Literacy in understanding and beliefs also translate to behavioral shifts? The connection between beliefs and behavior is critical because students are more likely to participant in mitigation behaviors if they have the ability (and belief in their ability) to produce effective change. This coincides with the findings of Clement, Henning, and Osbaldiston (2014). On the pre CCBBS participants all reported recycling everything they could, devoting money to purchasing products that are environmentally friendly, and rallying for policies that are good for the environment. In the
59


post CCBBS, only seven participants reported recycling everything they could and rallying for policies
that are good for the environment. However, seven participants reported reducing their electricity
consumption on the post CCBBS and only five participants reported doing likewise on the pre CCBBS.
In the post CCBBS, all participants again reported devoting money to purchasing products that are
environmentally friendly. Overall, it appeared participants' climate change mitigation behavior
actually decreased on the post CCBBS, but was still higher than the results of Wachholz, Arts, &
Chene, (2012). (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, (2012) found 85 percent of students were not
participating in any personal action to reduce their carbon footprint.) Yet, when the open responses,
focus group, interviews, and observations were taken into account participants were not less
actively mitigating climate change, but more critical of themselves and their actions:
This course has taught me many things like how to make my own garden and bat house. I learned so many things by actually doing them at the farm. And I do those things now. Before, I didn't even know they existed. I try to make my footprint smaller, but I don't think I do enough. (Participant, personal commination, fall, 2015)
This illustrates the importance of utilizing mixed methods as one method explains the other and sheds new light on the results' meaning.
CCCT
No statistically significant increase was found in participants' overall score between pre and post CCCT. However, after taking the course, participants were more aware of local flooding and its connection to climate change, which is reflected in the post survey responses and qualitative results. However, there was not enough of a score increase between pre and post tests to be detected by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. This was most likely due to the lack of statistical power resulting from the small sample size and ceiling effect caused by participants' high pre test scores. Also, participants were not given enough time to complete the post test so scores did not reflect participants' actual growth in climate change understanding.
60


To address the research question further, I next examined why shifts did or did not occur in
students' climate change beliefs and/or behavior. Specifically, case studies of one student who shifted their beliefs and behaviors a great deal and one who shifted very little were analyzed. The focus group and observations were also used in this analysis.
Focus Group and Observations
The focus group took place at the farm after class was dismissed. Participants were asked what teaching method(s) were preferable for learning science and why. Participants were also asked if they would take another course that utilized intensive field methods. All the participants spoke and were in agreement with one another:
I like hands-on learning. In the field. You know, getting dirty.
Me too... it helps me understand what I'm supposed to be learning. I can see the interactions, it means something personal to me.
If I can see, and smell, and touch, and taste something it makes the learning come to life and it sticks with me.
I would definitely take another course like thisif they would let me. It's the way I learn best. I think it's that way for a lot of people.
Even though students did not use the term "Experiential Education," they definitely described ExEd and why they preferred to learn that way. ExEd made the concepts "come to life" for them because they could interact with their understanding. This was also observed in the course. Participants literally got their hands dirty and were excited to see concepts tied to practice. Participants even came to a Saturday session to observe how the sorghum they planted as a drought resistant crop could be baked into bread. Participants eagerly took turn baking the bread (and eating it). Any technique students could use in their lives was closely observed and discussed in subsequent weeks to determine best practices:
61


Participant A: Did your bat house work?
Participant B: You mean did a bat move in?
Participant A: Yeah.
Participant B: No... I think I placed it on the wrong side of my house. Too hot. (Participants, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Participants learned that bats could ingest over a thousand insects in one night and were keen to
decrease their local insect populations in a natural, pesticide free manner. They also made the
connection between an increase in mosquito populations to climate change (i.e., increase in winter
temperatures). Participants' responses on the CCCT indicated they realized this occurrence though
connections made in the course.
Interestingly, all focus group participants wanted to take more "field courses", but were having difficulty counting those courses towards their science degree:
They consider them social science....not "real" (participant uses air quotes) science. How is this not real science? We are measuring, analyzing, making conclusions about urban agriculture. How is this less science than doing measurements on a glacier?
This is just an elective for me and I don't understand why.
It's only required if you get a certificate in sustainable urban agriculture.
(Participants, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Participants were very concerned the course was not being taken seriously by the science
department, but did not understand why. I suggest this may be due to the marginalization of ExEd
and PbEd in post-secondary education due to educators' lack of training, experience, and/or funding
to implement these methods/philosophies (Efstratia, 2014). Therefore, ExEd and PbEd are not well
understood (especially in the sciences) and thus not as accepted as traditional teaching methods.
Mini Case Studies
The pre/post CCBBS and CCCT gave a snap shot into the participants' understanding, beliefs, and behavior, but did not capture why. This was where the observations, focus group, and interviews were utilized to triangulate the findings. One participant (Participant Three) was interviewed to further examine why he dramatically shifted his understanding/ beliefs regarding
62


human induced climate change and his moral obligation to respond to it. Another participant (Participant One) was interviewed to further examine why she did not shift her understand/beliefs regarding human induced climate change and her moral obligation to respond to it.
Participant Three.
Participant Three grew up on a chicken farm and later enlisted in the armed forces where he served as a meteorologist. His ideas about climate change were shaped by his work in meteorology and the policies of the military:
Coming from the job I had previously where I was a meteorologist...in a lot of [those] meteorologists' minds climate change is make believe. We're just going through a natural warming cycle on the Earth and eventually we will go through a cooling phase...
(Participant Three, personal commination, fall, 2015)
Yet, why did Participant Three's ideas about climate change shift? The participant was adamant it
was first hand evidence that led him to change his mind regarding human's role in climate change
because he could see it:
There is actually something going on that's not Earth relatedit's caused by humans... In [Dr. Weaver's] class you see it first-hand. You get experiences and actually talk to professionals... whether it be [about] conservation easements to being a state engineer or seeing how our water ways have changed in the past twenty yearsespecially since our population has increased... For me, at least, hands-on being outside [is important], I'm a very visual learner. If I can see it, I can learn it. If I'm in a classroom with a white board I go to sleep mentally. You don't get to have the same types of conservationsyou don't know the questions to ask 'till you see it. It's more "I tell you what you need to know and write it down" and then you're going to be tested on it. Some people just don't learn that way...To see the trash in the water, the fertilizer [runoff], then the water reaches Denver on its way to Kansas. You can see how bad that water is. Who wants to eat vegetables that have pesticides inside? ...The pesticides are there because of all the bugsthere's more because of climate change. (Participant Three, personal commination, fall, 2015)
For Participant Three, seeing was truly believing. Yet, did believing impact his behaviors? For
this participant the answer was, "yes"first starting small and then reaching for higher
sustainability goals:
63


I don't use aerosols any more, which is a good thing. I try to use as little electricity as possible. We leave our lights off when we're not in the room. Try to only run the wash machine one time a week... I talk with my wife about what we want to do in five years to reduce our carbon footprint... We want to teach our kids about the world from when we had it to where it's going to be...how do we want our grandkids' world to be? We point out observations [to our children]see all the trash that's here? We need to do our part to keep the environment as pristine as possible. Either recycle it or compost it... [Eventually] we want to take mass transport...or...community vehiclesDenver's big on that...Reduces a lot of our carbon footprint downtown. (Participant Three, personal commination, fall, 2015)
The course also gave this participant tools that led to community activism to promote
sustainability for both the environment and the human community: "I talked to our parks people
about doing a community garden, but they said nojust space for a playground, which I can
understand...but both can be together... So [I] will keep talking and maybe they will hear me"
(Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015). This demonstrates Participant Three's
increased Climate Change Literacy as he is "taking individual and/or group action through
persuasion, consumerism, political action, legal action, and eco-management to mitigate climate
change" (Figure 2). Indeed, Participant Three's dramatic shift in climate change understanding and
behavior precipitated a shift in behavior to more effectively mitigating climate change.
Participant Three was then asked if place-based education was essential for learning about
difficult and controversial subjects. He first responded by saying "no", but went on to talk about the
importance of a sense of place and application of knowledge:
The closer you are to where you learn, the more you care about it... But if you can uproot what you learned to any where you live, it [the learning] goes with you there to that place. You have to be able to apply it [the learning]. If you can't apply it, then that would be a negativefor you and where you live.
(Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015)
According to Participant Three, the more connected to where you learn, the more you care about
the learning. If you can apply your learning to where you live, the learning keeps living and growing,
which is beneficial for the participant and for their community as a whole. This is connected to the
participant's sense of place, which is essential to Place-based Education.
64


Participant One.
While Participant One did not share a great deal of personal background, she did give
insights into her thinking and behavior surrounding climate change:
I've always loved the environment and knew we needed to protect it. That hasn't changed. I've always known about climate change and knew it was real and caused by us. I've tried to help the environment too....Now I know a lot more ways I can help so I do more.
(Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Other than having a deeper understanding of climate change and doing more to mitigate it,
Participant One was questioned on what else transformed within her climate change understanding
and/or beliefs. Her answer was indicative of operational Climate Change Literacy: "Student shows
affects, attitudes, and values that indicate a valuation of both nature and society" (Figure 2).
The health of the environment will only get worse because there will be less and less clean water, food, and air. Because of that there will be more chronic and acute human diseases. This course made all the environmental information more connected to peopleit started me thinking about the connection between climate change and human development. I use to be all negative about peopleyou knowthey're all bad, make bad choices. But now I understand people more. I care about people and the environment.
(Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Even though Participant One did not show any dramatic increases from pre to post CCBBS or CCCT
scores, she discussed significant shifts in her Climate Change Literacy by valuing both humans and the
environment. Participant One also increased her behavior in climate change mitigation activities, but
was much more critical of herself so this was not reflected in her post CCBBS:
I garden organically now and teach my friends about it. I watch what I buy even more carefully. But I feel bad about driving so muchthere's no good public transportation in a lot of areas. I could do better though. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Lastly, Participant One made certain to credit the "field" nature of the course for her
increased climate change awareness. For example, "The course put to work my previous knowledge
and applied it to issues around land, water, agriculture and the environment at the farm. I could see
65


the plants growing and the goats eating the weeds. I helped do that!" (Participant One, personal
communication, fall, 2015). Participant One ended with a lament about the course not counting as a science credit:
The course isn't counted as a science credit for meI think it's an elective. I don't know why. I learned so much in that class that I didn't learn in my lecture classes. We need more courses like the one at the farm. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015)
This reinforces participants' desire for experiential courses and the conflict that ExEd and PbEd
often experiences within the science discipline.
Limitations of Pilot Study
Due to the very low course enrollment and consequential use of non-parametric tests, the results of this study are much less generalizable than if the study was conducted with a larger sample size. Additionally, there may have been other factors that impacted student increases in Climate Change Literacy that were not measured, such as ceiling effect. Ceiling effect occurs when scores are high enough on the pre assessment that it is unlikely to detect any change or improvement on the post assessment. Since participants elected to enroll in this course they already have an interest in environmental sustainability, which increases the probability of the ceiling effect.
Furthermore, participants' demographics for this study were very similar as all were either STEM major or minors and all were between 22 to 32 years of age. Only 25 percent of participants were members of a minority group and 63 percent identified as female. These demographics were not representative of the university as a whole. The participant demographics may have impacted the outcome of this study by predisposing participants to certain understandings, beliefs, and behavior. It would be ideal to conduct this study on participants representing a mix of undergraduate and graduate students from diverse academic focuses and backgrounds.
66


Lastly, having a control group who are not involved in the course would be ideal to help
control for diffusion of treatment (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). However, this study can still be applied to similar groups of students and is a springboard for additional research on learning design elements that are suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy as well as further refinement of the conceptual model. This study also demonstrated the need for mixed methods and how qualitative data can inform the quantitative results through triangulation and thus lead to more accurate findings.
Conclusions
Crona, Wutich, Brewis, and Gartin's (2013) research correlates higher education with a lower sense of personal risk towards the effects of climate change due to students' lack of direct experience with it. When students have a direct experience with the impacts of climate change, it increases their sense of personal risk and thus increases their Climate Change Literacy. Essentially students are decreasing their psychological distance (Liberman & Trope, 2008) to climate change. It appears direct experience that ties to students' sense of place is even more impactful than accessing their conceptual ecology. This was observed when this study was compared to the findings of Rule and Meyer (2009) as well as Nam and Ito (2011). Additionally, when participants researched their own questions they increased their Climate Change Literacy though accessing their sense of place. These questions stemmed from the cognitive dissonance the course planted in participants through learning design elements initiated and supported by ExEd and PbEd. An example of participants' research questions was investigating if organic produce is truly better for human health as well as why organics are priced much higher than non-organics that need more pesticides and fertilizers.
67


Experiential and Place-based Education are both excellent teaching methods for promoting
learning design elements that help students accommodate difficult and often controversial science concepts. However, students' conceptual ecology is also important to address through each approach. Thus, conceptual ecology can positively impact student understanding, beliefs, and behavior surrounding climate change and its mitigation.
Research Product:
Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy Conceptual Model
As the learning design elements that support Climate Change Literacy emerged from this pilot study's results, limitations, and conclusions, it became clear the initial conceptual model (Figure 2) required revising.

(Helps Students to Accommodate Higher Levels of Climate Change Literacy)
Figure 2. Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta, 2015).
68


Therefore, I updated my conceptual model by making the separate elements of CLT more explicit and central to the model. I focused the model on decreasing students' psychological distance from climate change, students' sense of place, and having students investigate their own questions as three vital learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy (Figure 9). These were the design elements participants referenced when demonstrating higher levels of Climate Change Literacy. The Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy conceptual model is a product of this pilot study and answers the research question, What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? I suggest sense of place, experiencing climate change first hand to decrease the psychological distance from the phenomenon, and self-driven research increase students' Climate Change Literacy because they all bind climate change to students' current life.
Asking and Investigating Own Questions
Connecting to Sense of Place
7ZY
Decreasing Psychological Distance to Phenomena
Figure 9. Revised conceptual model: Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta, 2016).
69


This pilot study provides evidence that the above conceptual model is successful at assisting students in shifting (accommodating) their Climate Change Literacy from non-existent to functional (Participant Three) or from functional to operational (Participant One). These learning design elements supported through Experiential and Place-based Education positively affected students' understanding, beliefs, and behavior as identified by the students themselves:
The closer you are to where you learn, the more you care about it....But if you can
uproot what you learned to any where you live, it [the learning] goes with you there to that place. You have to be able to apply it [the learning],
(Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015)
Simply stated, the course allowed students to apply their knowledge to their lives: "[The course]
provided me with important ways to grow my own food, be aware of complexities of the agricultural
system, and be more aware and in touch with our land" (Participant Seven, personal commutation,
fall, 2015).
The following is an example of how this conceptual model could be operationalized for Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I: Students utilize their research results obtained from investigating their own question to create and implement a plan in their community to decrease the area's contribution to climate change. This would connect to students' sense of place and decrease their psychological distance to climate change, as they would be acknowledging its existence where they live. Students would also exercise their conceptual ecology to access previous experiences in their community. Additionally, this project would help students become agents of ecological change, as was the hope they expressed in this study's findings.
70


Conceptual Model's Significance
In conclusion, this study investigated what learning design elements are suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy in higher education and developed a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy. Through Experiential and Place-based Education, three vital design elements were fostered for helping students accommodate new climate change understanding, beliefs, and mitigation behavior. These learning design elements were:
1. Decreasing students' psychological distance from climate change;
2. Utilizing students' sense of place; and
3. Student investigation of their own research questions.
By utilizing these design elements supported in Experiential and Place based Education, this study suggests students can increase their Climate Change Literacy, which confirms this study's hypothesis. Since there are no existing models that discuss learning design elements to increase student's Climate Change Literacy, the importance of this pilot study's conceptual model is significant. The design elements have been discussed by other researchers, but not tied to each another or in relation to Climate Change Literacy. In addition, the approach of students investigating their own questions is unique to this study.
Due to this pilot study's preliminary evidence (as observed with Participant One), further investigation is warranted to determine if the learning design elements illustrated in my conceptual model can indeed increase students' Climate Change Literacy. Students becoming Climate Change Literate is the critical first step in making major societal transformations required for mitigating climate change, our most pressing environmental issue that impacts all people and the natural environment (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). This may begin an answer as Siperstein (2014) hopes.
71


However, this study's conceptual model has potential beyond course design for teaching Climate Change Literacy or even Environmental Literacy. I believe this study's conceptual model can be a new teaching model for science educators who must instruct students on topics that are conceptually difficult and controversial (like climate change). This is due to the model's learning design elements that can be applied to any topic. Furthermore, I believe there is potential for this conceptual model to be generalized across different disciplines (e.g. geography, life science, social studies, history, etc.), just as ExEd and PbEd can be used as teaching methods in any academic field. The conceptual model's learning design elements are successful at inducing conceptual and behavioral change through accommodation via cognitive dissonance. This is because these learning design elements attach onto what students already know and feel (their conceptual ecology and sense of place) and connect it to new understandings presented in a course. This makes attachments for students in both their head and heart.
Next Steps
Additional studies involving larger enrollment courses where climate change is an objective should be investigated to provide a larger empirical test of the conceptual model. Results could be further generalized if participants are representative of a more diverse student population, including those outside of STEM majors and minors. Such a study would also measure students' climate change learning gains and increases in Climate Change Literacy to help determine the accuracy of my conceptual model.
Moreover, I recommend a conversation be initiated in post-secondary education about the benefits of utilizing Experiential and Place-based Science Education. ExEd and PbEd promote Science Literacythe application of science understandings and skills in the real world2by supporting
2 The three major components of Science Literacy discussed by Miller (1989) are the following: 1. An understanding of the science processes or methods fortesting models of reality; 2. A basic vocabulary of scientific and technical terms as well as concepts; and 3. An understanding of science and technology's impact on society.
72


specific learning design elements (Figure 9) that increase students' cognitive gains and affective growth. Specifically, educative and place-based experiences promote students' positive emotionality towards science through their 'sense of place'the relationships and meanings each student attaches to physical spaces (Gruenewald, 2003; Sobel, 2004). Students' positive emotionality towards science is imperative to develop because it inspires their engagement, science identity, emotional attachments, and even "ah-ha" moments of cognitive understandings (Shen, Yuan, Liu, & Luo, 2016). By developing students' emotionality and cognitive growth, Experiential and Place-based Education opens science to all students. Climate Change Literacyand more generally Science Literacyis imperative for every student because science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society. As stated in the introduction to this pilot study, science opens doors to high-paying professions as well as provides a knowledge base for informed conversations with health care workers, educators, and leaders (Barton, 2008). Science also demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water quality standards, population density, toxic dumping, and building regulations (Barton, 2008). Consequently, understanding science that impacts our present and future is imperative for making critical life choices. Thus, it is essential that educators teach Climate Change Literacy and Science Literacy through educational experiences that are accessible both conceptually and emotionallyto all students.
73


Figure 10. The author and Oreo the goat at the urban farm (thanks to the University of Colorado Denver, 2015).
74


REFERENCES
Akerlof, K., Maibach, E. W., Fitzgerald, D., Cedeno, A. Y., & Neuman, A. (2013). Do people "personally experience" global warming, and if so how, and does it matter? Global Environmental Change, 23, 81-91. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.006
Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science, 21, 147-152. doi: 10.1177/0956797609356283
Barton, A. C. (2008). Urban science education: A commitment to equity, social justice, and a sense of place. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 1-37. doi: 10.1080/03057260208560186
Benjamin, D. J., Cesarini, D., Loos, M. J., Dawes, C. T., Koellinger, P. D., Magnusson, P. K., et al.
(2012). The genetic architecture of economic and political preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 8026-8031. doi:10.1073/pnas. 1120666109
Bord, R. and O'Connor, R. (1997). The gender gap in environmental attitudes: The case of perceived vulnerabilities to risk. Social Science Quarterly, 78(4), 830-840.
Bruner, J. S., & Goodman, C. C. (1947). Value and need as organization factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42, 33-44. doi: 10.1037/h0058484
Buckingham, S. & Kulcur, R. (2009). Gendered geographies of environmental justice. Antipode, 41(4), 659-683.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 171-246). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Carver, R. (2008). Theory of practice: a framework for thinking about experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 19(1), 8-13.
75


Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 366-375. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.34.3.366
Clement, C. A., Henning, J. B., & Osbaldiston, R. (2014). Integrating factors that predict energy
conservation: The theory of planned behavior and beliefs about climate change. Journal of Sustainable Development, 7(6), 46. doi:10.5539/jsd.v7n6p46
Committee on Recognizing, Evaluating, Rewarding, and Developing Excellence in Teaching of
Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology [CTUSMET], (2003). Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. (M. A. Fox & N. Hackerman, Eds.). National Academies Press.
Coppola, B. P. (2013). Laboratory instruction: Ensuring an active learning experience. In Svinicki & McKeachie (Eds.), McKeachie's Teaching Tips, 277-287. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Costa, V. (1995). When science is "another world": Relationships between worlds of family, friends, school, and science. Science Education, 79(3), 313-333.
Creech, L. R. & Sweeder, R. D. (2012). Analysis of student performance in large-enrollment life science courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 11, 386-391.
Crona, Wutich, Brewis, & Gartin. (2013). Perceptions of climate change: Linking local and global perceptions through a cultural knowledge approach. Climatic Change, 119(2), 519-531.
D'Avanzo, C., Anderson, C., Hartley, L. & Pelaez, N. (2012). A faculty-development model for transforming introductory Biology and Ecology courses. BioScience, 62(4), 416-427.
David, J.L. (2008). What research says about project-based learning. Educational Leadership Teaching Students to Think, 65(5), 80-82.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Macmillan.
Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication, 61, 659-688.
76


Dunlap,J., Dobrovolny, J., Young D. (2008). Preparing e-learnin designers using Kolb's model of experiential learning. Journal of Online Education, 5(2), 1-9.
Eaves, L. J., & Eysenick, H. J. (1974). Genetics and the development of social attitudes. Nature, 249, 288-289. doi:10.1038/249288a0
Efstrtia, D. (2014). Experiential education through project based learning. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 1256-1260.
Evertson, C. & Green, J. (1985). Observation as inquiry and method. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),
Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd Edition (pp. 162-214). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Ewert, A. & Becker, D. (2001). Standing for where you sit: an exploratory analysis of the relationship between academic major and environment beliefs. Environment & Behavior, 33(5), 687-707.
Festinger, L. (1962). Cognitive dissonance. Scientific American, 207(4), 93-107.
Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision, and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Fielding, N. G., & Lee, R. M. (1998). Computer analysis and qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA Sage.
Feldman, L., Nisbet, M., Leiserowitz, A. and Mailbach, E. (2010). The climate generation? Survey
analysis of the perceptions and beliefs of young Americans. Yale Project on Climate Change and Center for Climate Change Communication, Yale University and George Mason University.
Geske, J. (1992). Overcoming the drawbacks of the large lecture class. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(4), 151-154.
Gifford, R., Scannell, L., Kormos, C., Smolova, L., Biel, A., Boncu, S. & Uzzell, D. (2009). Temporal pessimism and the spatial optimism in environmental assessments: an 18-nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 1-12.
77


Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Pub. Co.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-
method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. doi: 10.3102/01623737011003255
Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: a multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619-654.
Flartley, L., Wilke, B., Schramm, J., D'Avanzo, C. & Anderson, C. (2011). College students'
understanding of the carbon cycle: Contrasting principle-based and informal reasoning. Bioscience, 61(1), 65-75
Flassol, S. J. (2002). Teachers Guide to High Quality Educational Materials on Climate Change and Global Warming: Top 10 Things You Need to Know About Global Warming. Center for Integrated Study of the Fluman Dimensions of Global Change, Department of Engineering and Public Policy Carnegie Mellon University & the National Science Teachers Association. Retrieved from http://hdgc.epp.cmu.edu/teachersguide/teachersguide.htm
Flastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game: A case study. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 129-134.doi: 10.1037/H0057880
Flodgkinson, S. & Innes, J. (2001). The attitudinal influence of career orientation in lst-year
university students: environmental attitudes as a function of degree choice. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 37-40.
Floffman, M., & Barstow, D. (2007). Revolutionizing earth system science education for the 21st
century: Report and recommendations from a 50-states analysis of earth science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 151.
78


Jennings, M. K., & Gregory, B. M. (1984). Partisan orientations over the long haul: Results from the Three-Wave political socialization panel study. American Political Science Review, 78, 1000-1018. doi: 1955804
Johnson, D. R., Ruzek, M., & Kalb, M. (1997). What is earth system science? Paper presented at
Remote SensingA Scientific Vision for Sustainable Development. 1997 IEEE International, 2, 688-691.
Kahan, D. M. (2015) Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology, 36, 1-43.
Karpiak, C. & Baril, G. (2008). Moral reasoning and concern for the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(3), 203-208.
Kellstedt, P., Zahran, S. & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environment, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis, 28(1), 113-126.
Klymkowsky, M. & Garvin-Doxas, K. (2008). Recognizing students' misconceptions through Ed's tools and the Biology Concept Inventory. PLOS Biology, 6(3). doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060003.
Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillion, M., & Christy, S. M. (2008). The effects of class size on student grades at a public university. Economy Education Review, 27, 221-223.
Kolb, D. & Kolb, A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212.
Krueger, R. & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Kyriakopoulou, N. & Vosniadou, S. (2014). Using theory of mind to promote conceptual change in science. Science and Education, 23, 1447-1462.
Leech, N. L., Barrett, K, C., & Morgan, G. A. (2011). IBM SPSS for intermediate statistics: use and interpretation. New York, NY: Routledge.
79


Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Beyond constant comparison qualitative data analysis: Using Nvivo. School Psychology Quarterly, 26, 70-84. doi: 10.1037/a0022711
Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C, Smith N. (2010). Climate change in the American mind: Americans' global warming beliefs and attitudes in January 2010. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
Li, Y., Johnson, E. J., & Zaval, L. (2011). Local warming: Daily temperature change influences belief in global warming. Psychological Science, 22(4), 454-459. doi:10.1177/0956797611400913
Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2005). The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issues: An experimental test of the hot cognition hypothesis. Political Psychology, 26, 455-482. doi: 10.1111/J. 1467-9221.2005.00426.X
Markowitz, E. M. (2012). Is climate change an ethical issue? Examining young adults' beliefs about climate and morality. Climatic Change, 114(3), 479-495. doi: 10.1007/sl0584-012-0422-8
Marzetta, K. (Photographer). (2015, Summer). Near Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah [photograph].
Marzetta, K. (Photographer). (2016, Winter). Urban farm wetlands and fields in Wheat Ridge, Colorado [photograph].
McGowan, A. (2013). Teaching global climate change. Natural Science, 5(la), 120-123.
Miller, J. D. (1989). Scientific Literacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. San Francisco, CA.
Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., Barrett, K. C. (2007). SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nam, Y. & Ito, E. (2011). A climate change course for undergraduate students. Journal of Geoscience Education, 59, 229-241.
80


National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (NEETF). (2005). Understanding environmental literacy in America and making it a reality [Online], Available: http://neefusa.Org/resources/publications.htm#neetfpubs.
Newcomb, T. M., Koenig, K. E., Flacks, R., & Warwick, D. P. (1967). Persistence and change: Bennington College and its students after 25 years. New York: Wiley.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nisbet, M. C. (2010). Knowledge into action: Framing the debates over climate change and poverty. In P. D'Angelo & J.A. Kuypers (Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 43-83). New York: Routledge.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Piaget, J. (1968). Six Psychological Studies. Anita Tenzer (trans.). New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
Powers, A. L. (2004). An evaluation of four place-based education programs. Journal of Environmental Education, 35(4), 17-32.
Rockcastle, V. (1989). Environmental literacy: Philosophy, content, strategies. Nature Study, 43(1-2), 8-9, 22.
Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution, and directions in the 1990s. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
Rule, A. & Meyer, M. (2009). Teaching urban high school students global climate change information and graph interpretation skills using evidence from the scientific literature. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(5), p. 335-347.
81


Rural School and Community Trust. (2005). Rural School and Community Trust Annual Report 2005. Arlington, VA. Retrieved from:
http://www.ruraledu.org/user_uploads/file/2005_annual_report.pdf.
Salinger, M. (2005). Climate variability and change: past, present, and future an overview. Climate Change, 70(1/2), 9-29.
Schuldt, J. P. & Roh, S. (2014). Of accessibility and applicability: How heat related cues affect belief in 'global warming' versus 'climate change'. Social Cognition, 32(3), 217-238.
Seymour, E. & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Shen, W., Yuan, Y., Liu, C., & Luo, J. (2015). In search of the "aha!" experience: Elucidating the emotionality of insight problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 107(2), 281-298.
Siperstein, S. (2014). Teaching climate change. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 21 (1): 20-21. doi: 10.1093/isle/isu008
Smith, G. & Sobel, D. (2010). Piace-and community-based education in schools. New York, NY: Routledge.
Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms & communities. Great Barrington, MA: The Orion Society.
Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M. & Miller, H.L., Eds. (2007) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Spence A, & Pidgeon NF. (2010). Framing and communicating climate change: The effects of
distance and outcome frame manipulations. Global Environmental Change, 20, 656-667.
Spence, A., Poortinga, W. and Pidgeon, N. (2012). The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Analysis, 32, 957-972. doi: 10.1111/j.l539-6924.2011.01695.x
82


Sterman, J. & Sweeney, L. B. (2007). Understanding public complacency about climate change:
adults' mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter. Climate Change, 80, 214-238.
Sulloway, F. J. (1995). Birth-order and evolutionary psychology: A meta-analytic overview. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 75-80.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
University of Colorado Denver. (2014). The University by the Numbers [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.ucdenver.edu/about/WhoWeAre/Pages/QuickFacts.aspx
Unterhalter, E. (2009). What is equity in education? Reflections from the capability approach. Studies in Philosophy Education, 28, 415-424. doi: 10.1007/sll217-009-9125-7
Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception
and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-585. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577
Vosniadou, S., loannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 11, 381-419.
Wachholz, S., Artz, N., & Chene, D., (2012). Warming to the idea: university students' knowledge and attitudes about climate change. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 15(2), 128-141.
Watson, R. T., Zinyowera, M. C., Moss, R. H., Dokken, D. J., editors. (1996). Climate Change 1995-Impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change: scientific-technical analyses. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Weaver, A. (Photographer). (2016, June 7). Urban Farmhouse [digital image]. Retrieved from http://5fridgesfarm.com/about-us/
83


Weber,
Weber,
E. U. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 332-342. doi:10.1002/wcc.41
E. U., & Stern, P. (2011). Public understanding of climate change in the United States. American Psychologist, 66, 315-328. doi: 10.1037/a0023253
84


APPENDIX
A. Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey Sources
Figure Al. Climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs surveys (Markowitz, 2012, p. 485).
Domain Question Response Categories
Eth ics Do you consider climate change' to be an
ethical or mural issue?
Please explain your answer.
Do you personally feel a mural obligation to respond to climate change?
Do you feel personal responsibility for dealing with climate change?
Certainty How sure are you that climate change
(global warming) Ls already taking place?
You may haw noticed that climate change has been gelting some attention in the news.
What do you think? Do you think that climate change is happening?
Causes Assuming climate change is happening, do (see left)
you think it Ls...Caused mostly by humans;
Caused mostly by natural changes in the environment; Caused by both human activities and natural changes; None of the above because climate change isn't happening
Efficacy How much influence do you think you personally can have on limiting climate change?
The actions of a single individual, including myself won't make any difference in climate change
Yes; No; Not sure
Open-ended
Not at all; A little bit; Somewhat; Very much
Not at all; A little bit; Somewhat; Definitely
Not at all sure; A little unsure; Somewhat sure; Very sure
Yes; No; Dun't know
RLsk How much of a risk do yuu feel global warming
posses to you personally?
How much do you think climate change will harm people living in poor countries, either now or in the future?
Concern How important is the Issue of global warming to (3 items) you personally? I f nothing is done to reduce global warming how serious of a problem do you think it will be? How concerned are you about the possible effects of global warming?
Affect How strongly do you feel each of the following emotions
when you think abuul the issue of climate change? Worry; Guilt
Scientific To what extent do environmental scientists agree Consensus among themselves about the existence and causes of global warming?
Behavioral I intend to...use only recyclable and reusable products Intentions from now on; join and provide financial support (5 items) to pro-environmental organizations in the near future; actively rally for policies that are good for the environment; cut down on using electricity and driving byr at least 50*n; devote more money' to purchase ^^^^^^^^^^jrroducts^hatjueenvrionmenlalK^friendK^^^^^^^^
None; Some; A little; Large
Strongly disagree; Somewhat disagree; Unsure; Somewhat agree; Strongly agree
Veiy little (I) to A lot of risk (7)
Not at all; Only a little; A moderate amount; A lot; Extremely'
Not at all; Not too; Somewhat; Very; Extremely
Not at all; A little bit; Somewhat; Very
No agreement at all (I) to Near complete agreement (5)
Strongly' disagree (1) to Strongly' agree (9)
85


Figure A2. Climate change understanding, beliefs, and behavior student survey (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012).
How much had you thought about global warming before today? A lot Some A little Not at all
How important is the issue of global Extremely important Very important Somewhat important
warming to you personally? Not too important Not at all important
How worried are you about global warming? Very worried Somewhat worried Not very worried Not at all worried
When do you think global warming will start to harm... ... people in the United States? Now In 10 years In 25 yrs. nln50yrs. nlnlOOyrs. Never
... other people around the world? Now In 10 years In 25 yrs. In 50 yrs. nlnlOOyrs. Never
Most of my friends are trying to act in ways that reduce global warming. Strongly agree nSomewhat agree nSomewhat disagree nStrongly disagree
Do you think that global warming is happening? Yes Don't know No
Which comes closest to your views? Most scientists think global warming is happening.
There is a lot of disagreement among scientists.
Most scientists think global warming is not happening.
Don't know enough to say.
Which comes closest to your views on Human activities are a significant cause of global warming
global warming? Human activities are not a significant cause
Global warming isn't happening
Which of the following statements comes Humans can reduce global warming, and we are going to do so successfully.
closest to you r view? Humans could reduce global warming, but it's unclear at this point whether we will do what's needed.
Humans could reduce global warming, but people aren't willing to change their behavior; so, we're not going to.
Humans can't reduce global warming, even if it is happening.
Global warming isn't happening.
If you were to take steps to reduce your Improve my quality of life a lot Improve my quality of life a little
personal contribution to global warming, it would... Have no impact on my quality of life Decrease my quality of life
Don't know
On some issues people feel that they have 1 need a lot more information
all the information they need in order to form a firm opinion, while on other issues 1 need some more information
they would like more information before making up their mind. For global warming, 1 need a little more information
where would you place yourself? 1 do not need any more information
1 could easily change my mind about global warming. Strongly agree nSomewhat agree nSomewhat disagree nStrongly disagree
86


B. Climate Change Concept Test Sources
Figure A3. Carbon cycle 2011 concept inventory (Hartley et al., 2011, p. 70).
The trees in the rain forest contain molecules of chlorophyll (C55H7205N4Mg). Decide whether each of the following statements is true (T) of false (F) about the atoms in those molecules.
Some of the atoms in the chlorophy7ll came from...
T F Carbon dioxide in the air
T F Sunlight that provided energy for photosynthesis T F water in the soil T F Nutrient in the soil T F Glucose produced by photosynthesis T F The seed the tree grew from
One carbon enters a plant, it can be converted to energy for plant growth. True or false?
A mature maple tree can have a mass of 1 ton or more (dry biomass, after removing the water), yet it starts from a seed that weighs less than 1 gram. Which of the following processes contributes the most to this huge increase in biomass?
Absorption of mineral substances from the soil via the roots
Absorption of organic substances from the soil via the roots
Incorporation of C02 gas from the atmosphere into molecules by green leaves
Incorporation of H20 from the soil into molecules by green leaves
Absorption of solar radiation into the leaf
87


Figure A4. Global warming ten most important concepts (Hassol, 2002).
Top Ten Things You Need to Know About Global Warming
There are a number of widely held misconceptions about climate change, and unfortunately, these are reflected in some
of the educational materials available on the web. It is therefore crucial for teachers to educate themselves and their
students with accurate information and be careful not to reinforce common but incorrect notions. The following primer is
a good place to begin:
1. Global warming is caused primarily by carbon dioxide from burning coal, oil and gas. Certain gases that trap heat are building up in Earth's atmosphere. The primary culprit is carbon dioxide, released from burning coal, oil and natural gas in power plants, cars, factories, etc. (and to a lesser extent when forests are cleared). The second is methane, released from rice paddies, both ends of cows, rotting garbage in landfills, mining operations, and gas pipelines. Third are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and similar chemicals, which are also implicated in the separate problem of ozone depletion (see #5 below). Nitrous oxide (from fertilizers and other chemicals) is fourth.
2. Earth's average temperature has risen about 1-degree F in the past 100 years and is projected to rise another 3 to 10 degrees F in the next 100 years. While Earth's climate has changed naturally throughout time, the current rate of change due to human activity is unprecedented during at least the last 10,000 years. The projected range of temperature rise is wide because it includes a variety of possible future conditions, such as whether or not we control greenhouse gas emissions and different ways the climate system might respond. Temperatures over the US are expected to rise more than over the globe as a whole because land areas closer to the poles are projected to warm faster than those nearer the equator.
3. There is scientific consensus that global warming is real, is caused by human activities, and presents serious challenges. Scientists working on this issue report that the observed global warming cannot be explained by natural variations such as changes in the sun's output or volcanic eruptions. The most authoritative source of information is the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which draws upon the collective wisdom of many hundreds of scientists from around the world. The IPCC projects global temperature increases of 3 to 10 degrees F in the next 100 years and says that human activity is the cause of most of the observed and projected warming
4. There's a difference between weather and climate. Weather refers to the conditions at one particular time and place, and can change from hour to hour, day to day, and season to season. Climate, on the other hand, refers to the longterm average pattern of weather in a place. For example, we might say that the climate of South Florida is warm, moist and sunny, although the weather on a particular day could be quite different than that. Long-term data are needed to determine changes in climate, and such data indicate that Earth's climate has been warming at a rapid rate since the start of intensive use of coal and oil in the late 1800s.
5. The ozone hole does not cause global warming. Ozone depletion is a different problem, caused mainly by CFCs (like Freon) once used in refrigerators and air conditioners. In the past, CFCs were also used in aerosol spray cans, but that use was banned in the US in 1978. CFCs deplete the stratospheric ozone layer that protects life on Earth from excess ultraviolet light that can cause skin cancer and cataracts in humans and other damage to plants and animals. An international agreement has phased out most uses of CFCs but the ozone layer is only just beginning to recover, partly because these chemicals remain in the atmosphere for a long time. (Although ozone depletion is not the cause of global warming, there are a number of connections between the two. For example, many ozone-depleting compounds are also greenhouse gases. Some of the compounds now replacing CFCs in order to protect ozone are also greenhouse gases. And ozone itself is a greenhouse gas. In addition, while greenhouse gas build-up causes temperatures close to Earth's surface to rise, it causes temperatures higher up, in the stratosphere, to fall. This stratospheric cooling speeds ozone depletion, delaying the recovery of the ozone hole.)
6. Global warming will have significant impacts on people and nature. As temperatures continue to rise, precipitation is projected to come more frequently in the form of heavy downpours. We can probably expect more extreme wet and dry conditions. In the western US, where snowpack provides free storage of most of the water supply, reduced snowpack will make less water available in summer. Coastal areas will become more vulnerable to storm surges as sea level rises. Plant and animal species will migrate or disappear in response to changes in climate; New England may lose its lobsters and maple trees as they move north into Canada. Natural ecosystems such as coral reefs, mangrove swamps, arctic tundra, and alpine meadows are especially vulnerable and may disappear entirely in some areas.
88


While global warming will have impacts on natural and human systems all around the world, the largest impacts will be on many natural ecosystems and on people who live in developing countries and have few resources and little ability to adapt. On the positive side, warmer winters will reduce cold-related stresses and growing seasons will lengthen. And there will be tradeoffs in some areas, such as less skiing but more hiking; and fewer killing frosts but more bugs.
7. Sea levels have already risen due to warming and are projected to rise much more. Many people are under the mistaken impression that only if the polar ice caps melt will sea level rise. In fact, average sea level around the world has already risen 4 to 8 inches in the past 100 years due to global warming and is expected to rise another 4 to 35 inches (with a best guess of around 19 inches) by 2100. The primary reason for this rise is that water expands as it warms. The second reason is that glaciers all over the world are melting, and when land-based ice melts, the water runs to the sea and increases its level. Thousands of small islands are threatened by the projected sea-level rise for the 21st century, as are low-lying coastal areas such as southern Florida. Of course, if there is any significant melting of the polar ice sheets, the additional rise in sea level would be enormous (measured in feet not inches). This is projected to occur on a time scale of millennia rather than centuries.
8. Saving energy and developing alternative energy sources would help. Each of us can reduce our contribution to global warming by using less greenhouse gas producing energy: driving less, choosing fuel efficient cars and appliances (like refrigerators and water heaters), and using solar energy where feasible for water and space heat. We can encourage our political and business leaders to institute policies that will save energy and develop alternative energy sources that do not release carbon dioxide. We can preserve existing forests and plant new ones. But even if we take aggressive action now, we cannot completely prevent climate change because once carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere, it remains there for about a century, and the climate system takes a long time to respond to changes.
But our actions now and in the coming decades will have enormous implications for future generations.
9. An international agreement known as the Kyoto Protocol has been negotiated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but the US is not participating in it. Because of its high energy consumption, the US has long emitted more carbon dioxide than any other country. Because carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for about 120 years, it accumulates, becomes equally distributed around the world, and has global effects. Thus, while using large amounts of energy to achieve economic growth, the US and other wealthy nations have unintentionally burdened the rest of the world with a long-term problem. And many negative impacts of climate change are likely to be more severe for poorer countries that lack the resources to adapt. The US has more technological and financial resources than other nations. The role of the US in reducing its own emissions and sharing its technologies with other nations will thus be critical to the success of international efforts to limit climate change. Meanwhile, we do not have to wait for the government to take action. Some companies, governments and individuals have already committed to reducing their emissions of greenhouse gases without laws or treaties requiring them to do so.
10. Protecting the world's climate by stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will require enormous reductions in current emissions. Even if ratified, the Kyoto Protocol in its present form is only a start and would not be nearly enough to stabilize climate. It is estimated that greenhouse gas emissions would have to be reduced to less than one third of current levels to stabilize atmospheric concentrations. This would require a major transformation of the energy sector. A mix of new and existing energy technologies will be needed to achieve this, including large increases in energy efficiency and renewable energy. Researchers are also developing technology to capture and bury carbon dioxide thousands of feet underground. Major increases in public and private research and development are needed to make the necessary technologies available as rapidly and economically as possible.
89


Figure A5. Climate change cultural consensus questions (Crona, Wutich, Brewis, & Gartin, 2013, p. 524).
I lave rain patterns changed in die last 20 years? ¥
Are summers hotter now than they once were? Y
Are winters colder now than they once were? Y
Do asphalt/paved surfaces cause changes in local climate? Y
Are changes in monsoons a sign of climate change? Y
Can pollution cause global climate change? Y
Are there fewer mosquitoes and other insects than there were 20 years ago? N
Are changes in sandstorms a sign of climate change? Y
Is climate change causing it to rain more titan it once did? Y
Do mads flood less heavily than they used to? N
Are allergies a bigger problem for people than they used to be? Y
Do farmers need less water for crops and animals than they used to? N
Is population growth a cause of climate change? Y
Is the sea level rising? Y
Are droughts becoming less frequent? N
Are more hurricanes or cyclones a sign of climate change? Y
Is ocean life dying oft? Y
Is climate change causing people to suffer more sickness? Y
Is crop failure a sign of climate change? Y
Is it easier to make a living fishing as a result of climate change? N
Are fish migration patterns changing as a result of climate change? Y
Are glaciers melting as a result of climate change? Y
Are stronger winds a sign of climate change? Y
Are natural disasters increasing as a result of climate change? Y
Is snowball decreasing as a result of climate change? Y
Are crop growing seasons changing? Y
Are fresh water sources being improved by climate change? N
Is the food supply made more secure by climate change? N
Is climate change making people healthier? N
Are diseases like malaria or dengue on die rise as a result of climate change? Y
Is water pollution a sign of climate change? N
Is rainfall decreasing as a result of climate change? Y
Are islands disappearing because of climate change? Y
Is there less fresh water available for people to use nowr titan 20 years ago? Y
Is the weather more predictable nowr than it was 20 years ago? N
Are animal migration patterns changing? Y
90


Figure A6. Climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs survey (Markowitz, 2012, p. 485).
Causes: Assuming climate change is happing do you think it is...Caused mostly by humans; Caused mostly by natural changes in the environment; Caused by both human activities and natural changes; None of the above because climate change isn't happening.
Scientific Consensus: To what extent do environmental scientists agree among themselves about the existence and causes of global warming?
91


C. Study Instruments
Figure A7. Pre and Post Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey (CCBBS) constructed by the author.
Pre CCBS
How much have you thought about climate change before today? A lot Some A little Not at all
Which do you agree with most? Most scientists think climate change is happening. There is a lot of disagreement among scientists. Most scientists think climate change is not happening. Don't know enough to say.
Do you believe that climate change is happening? Yes Don't know No
Which do you agree with most? Human activities are a significant cause of climate change Human activities are not a significant cause Climate change isn't happening
How important is the issue of climate change to you personally? Extremely Very Somewhat Not too Not at all Important important important important important
Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? Please explain your answer.
How worried are vou about climate change? Very worried Somewhat worried Not very worried Not at all worried
What do you consider to be the too three impacts of climate change? Please list. 1. 2. 3.
If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Please explain your answer.
92


Full Text

PAGE 1

CHANGING THE CLIMATE OF BELIEFS: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF LEARNING DESIGN ELEMENTS TO PROMOTE CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY B y KATRINA LEONA MARZETTA B.A., University of Denver, 2004 M.A., University of Colorado Denver, 2008 M.A., University of Denver, 2011 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education and Human Development 2016

PAGE 2

ii 2016 KATRINA LEONA MARZETTA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

iii This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy degree by Katrina Leona Marzetta has been approved for the Education and Human Development By Robert (Bud) Talbot, Chair Alan Davis, Advisor Bryan Wee Susan Connors Date: July 30, 2016

PAGE 4

iv Marzetta Katrina Leona (PhD, Education and Human Development) Changing the Climate of Beliefs: Effects of Experiential and Place based Education on University Thesis directed by Associate Professor Alan Davis ABSTRACT Science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society as it opens doors to high paying professions as well as demystifies environmental issues that impact everyd ay life like air/water quality standards and population density (Barton, 2008). Understanding science that impacts our present and future, like the science of climate change, is imperative for making critical life choices. Climate change is a difficult sub ject to teach because it requires complex scientific understandings and is connected to personal beliefs (Spence, Poortinga & Pidgeon, 2012). It is important to teach students the science of climate change and impact their personal beliefs to produce behav ior that will mitigate climate change. In this study learnin g design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy in higher education were identified and a conceptual model was developed to improve the tea ching of Climate Change Literacy F indings depicted three design elements that increase students : 1) psychological distance from clima te change 2) and 3) Student investigation of their own research questions Increas the critical first step in making societal transformations required for mitigating climate change, our most pressing environmental issue that impacts all people and the natural environment (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidg eon, 2012). The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Alan Davis

PAGE 5

v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. I NTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 1 Background and Research Question ................................ ................................ ........................ 3 Significance ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 4 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 8 II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 9 Proposed Climate Change Literacy Framework ................................ ................................ ..... 11 Climate Change Literacy Component 1: Understanding ................................ ................. 14 Climate Change Literacy Component 2: Beliefs ................................ .............................. 15 Climate Change Literacy Component 3: Behavior ................................ .......................... 16 Understanding, Beliefs, and Behavior Working To gether ................................ ............... 17 Proposed Conceptual Ecology Framework ................................ ................................ ..... 18 Proposed Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy .............. 19 Conceptual Framework Context ................................ ................................ ..................... 20 Literature Review ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 20 Research on Teaching Climate Change Understanding ................................ .................. 20 Research on Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior ................................ ......................... 26 Research on Experiential and Place based Education ................................ .................... 29 ................................ ......................... 32 III. PILOT STUDY ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 34 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 34 Overview and Research Design ................................ ................................ ....................... 34 Setting: Course Description and Location ................................ ................................ ....... 35 Particip ants ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 39 Quantitative Data Instruments and Collection ................................ ............................... 40 Qualitative Data Instruments and Collection ................................ ................................ .. 41 Quantitative Data Analysis ................................ ................................ .............................. 43 Qualitative Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ 43 Mixed Methods Triangulation Analysis ................................ ................................ ........... 44 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 44

PAGE 6

vi P ilot Results ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 45 CCBBS Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test ................................ ................................ ... 45 CCBBS Analysis: Coding of Open Response Items ................................ ........................... 46 CCCT Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test ................................ ................................ ..... 50 Comparing Assessments and Aggregated Scores ................................ ........................... 52 IV. A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY COURSE DESIGN ........................ 54 Discuss ion of Pilot Results ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 54 CCBBS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 54 CCCT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 60 Focus Group and Observations ................................ ................................ ....................... 61 Mini Case Studies ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 6 2 Participant Three ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 6 3 Participant One ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 6 5 Limitations of Pilot Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 66 Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 67 Research Product: Learning Design Elements for Promoting C CL Conceptual Mode l .......... 68 ................................ ................................ ........................... 71 Next Steps ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 72 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 75 APPENDIX A. Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey Sources ................................ ........................... 85 B. Climate Change Concept Test Sources ................................ ................................ .................. 87 C. Study Instruments ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 92 D. Pilot Data ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 102 E. Additional Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 112

PAGE 7

vii LIST OF TABLES TABLES 1. The competency levels of E nvironmental Literacy (Roth, 1992, p. 18) ................................ ......... 10 2. C ompetency level indicators for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (modified from Roth, 1992, p. 27 34) ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 12 3. study (2011, p. 234 235) .................. 23 4. Learning methodology for the global climate change unit studied by Rule and Meyer (2009, p. 341) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 24 5. (2009, p. 345) ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 25 6. Self reported parti cipant demographic and descriptive statistics. ................................ ............... 39 7. General question pos ed to participants in the CCBBS and purpose for asking them ................... 40 8. CCBBS statistics ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 46 9. Coding of open responses for the pre and post CCBBS ................................ ................................ 49 10. CCCT s tatistics for question s 1.1 20.a ................................ ................................ ............................ 51 11. CCCT statistics for question s 12.1 33 ................................ ................................ ............................. 52 12. ................................ ... 53

PAGE 8

viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURES 1. Photograph near Bryce Canyon National P ark in Southern Utah (Marzetta, 2015) ........................ 1 2. Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote CCL (Marzetta, 2015) ................ 19, 68 3. Political identity and science understanding (Roth, 1992, p. 12) ................................ .................. 28 4. The Experiential Learning Cycle and regions of the cerebral cortex (Kolb & Kolb, 20 05, p. 195) 30 5. Course schedule of specifi c top ic s, reading, and guest speakers ................................ .................. 37 6. The urban farm house in What Ridge, Colorado that served at the classroom (Weaver, 2016) .. 38 7. s that served as research sites for much of the course (Marzetta, 2016) ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 38 8. Observation f ield notes format (Evertson & Green, 1995) ................................ ............................ 42 9. Revised c onceptual model: Learning Design Elements for Promoting CCL (Marzetta, 2016) ....... 69 10. The author and Oreo the goat at the urban farm ................................ ................................ ... 74

PAGE 9

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The colorful rock layers of this region and arid climate illustrate the story of climate change. The fossils found here are very different from the flora and fauna currently surviving. Once lush and tropical, all that remain of this envi ronment is beautiful geology Pink limestone and fossilized gastropods. How many vi story And its thread in their own? Figure 1 Photograph near Bryce Canyon National Park in Southern Utah (Marzetta, 2015) Just which grew up in an era of greater awareness and scientific certainty about climate change does not mean that students themselves have a meaningful understanding of climate change issues o r act upon that understanding. (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012, pp. 137 138)

PAGE 10

2 Teaching Climate Change Is a lot like searching for lucky stones after storms on the beaches of Lake Erie tiny ear bones of long dead fish like ivory that now, arranged on a desk, read like scrabble tiles of ancient text speak good luck, good luck, good luck, you're gonna need it. You are like a small man gone to find balance in miles of sand and dark water, then returned to a room, expecting to feel bigger than before. My students arrive every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon asking questions Swiftly my voice like a wave breaking over itself, then pulling back. and I try to hear goodness and grace, a little luck, and the sounds of a lake falling through trees at night, and any words that might begin an answer (Siperstein, 2014, p. 20 21)

PAGE 11

3 Background and Research Question Understanding science is critical because it helps us to better understand ourselves and our environment. Science education is not about students memorizing facts, but understanding and applying concepts that impact their daily lives. It i s teaching critical thinking and problem solving. Science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society as it opens doors to hig h paying professions. It provides a knowledge base for i nformed conversations with health care workers, educators, and leaders. Science also demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water pollution, population growth, toxic dumping, and bu ilding regulations (Barton, 2008) Therefore, understanding science that impacts our present and future, like the science of climate change, is imperative for making critical life choices. Climate change has become one of the most (if not the most ) severe environmental problem to arise in the last two decades that impacts our daily lives. A vast body of literature has emerged that illustrates how human activity since the Industrial Revolution has significantly changed global climate systems (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). Although there are regiona l variations in the degree a nd extent of climate change there is now collective research confirming rising ocean and land temperatures, increasi ng variability in precipitation, as well as more intense tropical ergovernmental Pane l on Climate Change (IPCC), 2014 ). Thus dangerous climate change is one of the most urgent social risks humans face today. Therefore understanding the science, beliefs, and behaviors around climate change is critical in making major so cietal transformations required for mitigation (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). The educational arena is critical for initiating such societal transformations. Consequently, learning design elements that cultivate climate change understanding through student beliefs and behavior is necessary.

PAGE 12

4 The purpose of this study is to develop a conceptual model that depicts learning design elements that promote Climate Change Literacy in higher education. The question that guides this pilot study is: What learn in g design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the tea ching of Climate Change Literacy 1 ? Experiential and Place based Education are both philosophies and methods that teach and beliefs thro ugh experiences. Consequently, they may provide insight into the specific learning design elements t hat promote Climate Change Literacy. conscious application of the students' experiences by integrating them into the curriculum where experience involves any combination of senses, emotion (Carver, 2008, pp. 150 151). Place where place refers not only to a physical location, but the relationships and meanings that learners attach to places (Gruenewald, 2003; Sobel, 2004). Learners use these different place attachments, their sense of place, to co mprehend concepts. PbEd validates different ways of knowing the world through inclusive curriculum and instruction. Due to ExEd an ion of student s emotions and experiences to impact their beliefs, behavior, and understanding these teaching Significance Students entering higher education instituti ons will be required to make complex decisions about climate change mitigation and will need to do so from an informed perspective. understandings regarding climate change issue s are a real concern due to the significant impacts of climate chan ge on humans and nature alike 1 The components of Climate Change Literacy include climat e change understanding, beliefs and mitigation behavior. Climate Change Literacy is further discussed in CHAPTER II: Conceptual Frameworks.

PAGE 13

5 education needs to expand its efforts to ensure all university graduates understand the scientific consensus about climate change and are actively engaged as part of the solution in their public and Wachholz, Arts, and Chene (2012) surveyed 375 students representing a cross section of disciplines at a mid sized university in New England and their results were disconcerting at best. Most students held misinformation about the basic causes and consequences of climate change, especially surrounding the ozone hole. In fact, the majority of students surveyed were not aware Earth is already experiencing the consequences of climate change: One in three students responded there is a lot of disagreement among scientists about whether climate change is even happening manufactured controversies produced by media, interest groups, and politicians who are funded by personal action to reduce gas emissions only 15 percent were at tempting to reduce their carbon footprint (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). These results (2013) research, which correlates higher education with higher income and lower involvement in rural economies and/or dire ct extraction of natural resources. Those with higher education tend to have a lower sense of personal risk towards the effects of climate change due to their lack of direct experience with it. Ano ther possible reason students did not act to mitigate clima te change is the ir belief that it is not an ethical problem (Markowit conviction that current climate change is not human induced in any way. As indicated by these studies, climate change i s a difficult subject to teach es pecially if understanding and mitigation behavior are learning outcomes. Understanding climate change requires the comprehension of complex scientific concepts like the carbon cycle, atmospheric circulation, as well as regional and te mporal variati ons in weather versus climate. It is also difficult

PAGE 14

6 to teach climate change because personal beliefs enter the scientific conversation ( Li, Johnson, & Zaval, 2011 ; Markowitz, 2012; Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012; Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012 ). This i s a similar problem faced by educato rs of germ theory and evolution Not but frequently is hear d The two foremost reasons are: The temporal and geographic scale in whi ch climate change operates. o especially when there are local fluctuation s that mask trends. This makes climate change very differ ent to understand and accept. The manu factured controversy surrounding climate change. o G reenhouse gas emissions must be reduced to less than one third of current levels to stabilize atmospheric concentrations, which would require a major transformation of the energy sector (Hassol, 2002). This would negatively impact many wealthy stakeholders, interest groups, and politicians supported by the fossil fuel industry (Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, 2012). These groups have considerable influence on their supporters. For students to understand climate change science and support climate change mitigation through personal action, th ey must believe in the phenomenon its cause, and in their ability to make a difference Clement, Henning, and Osbaldiston (2014) found people are more likely to conserve ability (and belief in their ability) to produce effective change needs to be part of climate change education.

PAGE 15

7 You have to love something and believe in the danger it faces to protect it when its protection means personal struggle. Science educators must understand the strong link between understanding and belief. It is possible to understand something, but not believe in it. This leads students to understand the science behind climate change, Thus, students do not c hange their behaviors to mitigate climate change even though they may score well on a climate change concept test. This is seen in the research of Nam and Ito (2011) as well as Rule and Meyer (200 9). In fact, s before their scientific understanding. This may make it difficult for students to comprehe nd or accept the science of climate change, as it does not support wh at students already think they know study conducted in 2015. change would definitely be incorrect. There is a very large one. But the nature of it depends on th concerned about climate change become even more so as their level of science comprehension increases. Those whose commitments predispose them to be less concerned become all the more skeptical. (Kahan, 2015, p. 12) because scie nce is intended to be objective and free of emotion. Science educators cannot assume students will utilize critical t hinking to understand climate change and act to mitigate i t simply by being exposed to research Students do no t leave their emotions, beliefs and behaviors at the threshold of the science classroom. I t is important to not only teach students about climate change, but also impact their personal beliefs to produce behavior that will mitigate climate change.

PAGE 16

8 Literature (i.e., Climate Change Literacy) has focused on primary and secondary education (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). The research on post secondary students tends to be over a decade old, narrowly focused on understandi ng, beliefs, or behavior. Therefore, there is a pressing nee d for science education research and behaviors along with their understanding due to the severity of climate change as a human induced environmental risk Students must understand the scientific consensus around climate change and be Consequently science educators must understand what learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy Limitations The study is limited because there are few university courses that use Experiential and Place based Education in the teaching of cl imate change Both methods require sma ll class sizes, which unfortunately is a rarity in higher education. Additionally, both methods rely on student experiences and emotional connections, which is considered taboo in Western science. Another limitation is results are only generalizable to universities with similar student demographics and course sizes. T he small number of participa nts decreases the generalizability of results as the results may not represent a saturated sample size depicting the populati beliefs, and mitigation behaviors. Finally, diffusion of treatment (Campbell & Stanley, 1963) may occur, which is very difficult to measure A and understanding from pre to post cannot be unambi guously attributed to the course design elements especially in the absence of a control group who were not involved in the course Diffusion of treatment is due to the daily information students receive about climate change thought the media and other sou rces.

PAGE 17

9 CHAPTER II C ONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS The purpose of science education is to provide students with the understanding and skills to ideal shapes the con ceptual framework of this study, which rests upon Environmental Lite racy. Literacy is more than being able to read and write. The idea of literacy has evolved over time with the concept of science literacy gaining momentum in the 1960s (Roth, 1992). Simply put, science outside of school The three major components of science literacy discussed by Miller (1989) are the following: 1. An understanding of the science processes or methods for testing models of reality 2. A basic vocabulary of scientific and technical terms as well as concepts and 3. Environmental Literacy stems from s cience literacy, but focus es on the environmental impacts of human behaviors. Roth (1992, p. 17) states that both science and environmental literacies involve people in: Using critical and creative thinking Seeking and organizing information Being healthily skeptical as well as Thinking a head and planning Additionally, Environmental Literacy involves people in (Roth, 1992, p. 17): Constantly seeing connections between objects and events ; Routinely looking for seeds of change ; Routinely evaluating the consequences of potential actions ; Rou tinely examining alternatives and making choices among them ;

PAGE 18

10 Constantly making choices among alternatives that have minimum negative impacts on natural systems ; and Acting responsibly as a living thing among many diverse, interacting, and interrelated life forms According to Roth (1992), Environmental Literacy is composed of six major areas: environmental sensitivity, knowledge, skills, affect, and behavior. However, I propos e to simplify these areas into three components to more easily analyze student gro wth in E nvironmental L iteracy : 1. Understanding of science concepts : K nowledge (facts) and skills ; 2. Affective (Beliefs) : Attitudes, values, and environmental sensitivity ; and 3. Behavior: Habits and actions as well as the e nactment of science knowledge and skills that supports environmental understanding advanced. The general competency levels of Environmental Literacy are Nominal, Functional, and Operational which are described in Table 1. Table 1 The competency levels of Environmental Literacy (Roth, 1992, p. 18). Nominal Environmental Literacy Functional Environmental Literacy Operational Environmental Literacy Indicates a person able to recognize many of the basic terms used in communicating about the environment. They are able to provide rough, if unsophisticated, working definitions of their meanings. Persons at the nominal level are developing an awareness and sensitivity towards the environment along with an attitude of respect for natural systems. They are developing a concept of the nature and magnitude of human impacts on natural systems. These persons also have a very rudimentary knowledge of how natural systems work and how human social sys tems interact with them. Indicates a person with a broader knowledge and understanding of the nature and interaction between human social systems and other natural systems. They are aware and concerned about the negative interaction between these systems i n terms of at least one or more issues. They have developed the skills to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information about issues using primary and secondary sources. They evaluate a selected problem/issue on the basis of sound evidence and personal val ues and ethics. They communicate their finding and feelings to others. On issues of particular concern to them, they show a personal investment and motivation for remediation using their knowledge of basic strategies for initiating and implementing social or technological change. Indicates a person who has moved beyond functional literacy in both the breadth and depth of understanding and skills. They routinely evaluate the impacts and consequences of actions; gather and synthesize pertinent information; ch oosing among alternatives; and advocating action positions as well as taking action to sustain or enhance a healthy environment. Such people demonstrate a strong, ongoing sense of investment and responsibility for preventing or remediating environmental de gradation both personally and collectively. These persons are likely to act at several levels from local to global. They are routinely engaged in dealing with the world at large.

PAGE 19

11 General indicators were ide ntified by Roth in 1992 i n order to determine stu Environmental Literacy competency level fo r each of the three components Students may be at different competency levels in the components of Environmental Literacy (Understanding, Affective, Proposed Climate Change Literacy Framework This pilot study drew on the literature regarding belief change to develop a model for designing courses to promote Climate Change Literacy regarding their climate change understanding will be measured by the Cl imate Change Content Test ( Appendix Figure A8 ). Environmental Literacy regarding their climate change beliefs and behaviors will be measured by the C limate C hange B eliefs and B ehavior Survey (Appendix Figure A7). The test survey observations, and inte rviews will be discussed in CHAPTER III. Consequently propose that Climate Change Literacy is part of Environmental Literacy in which the key component s are climate change understanding, beliefs and behavior to mitigate climate change. The following table summarizes the indicators of each competency lev el for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (u nderstanding, belief, and behavior ), which we re adapted from Roth (1992)

PAGE 20

12 Table 2 C ompetency level indicators for the three components of Climate Change Literacy (modified from Roth, 1992, p. 27 34). Competency Level Component Indicators of Climate Change Literacy Understanding Belief Behavior Nominal The nature of the basic components of elemental systems (especially carbon cycling) Types and examples of interactions between humans and nature Basic components of societal systems Identifying and defining problems regarding implications of climate change Recognizing issues surrounding identified climate change problems and proposed solutions Appreciation of both nature and society Elementary sensitivity and empathy for nature and society Elemental perceptions of points of conflict betwe en nature and society Familial, school, and youth organizations, activities, and habits aimed at maintenance of environmental quality and climate change mitigation Functional In addition to the above, students understand ecological, economic, geographic, religious, educational, and political processes leading to climate change Students understand the effects/impacts of humans on natural systems including: Population dynamics, interactions, interdependence, limiting factors, energy transfer/prod uction/storage degradation, biogeochemical cycling, communities, ecosystems, man as an ecological variable, uneven distribution of resources globally, understanding of scientific inquiry, thinking in terms of time frames or scales, and utilization of natu ral resources acting, judging, valuing, articulating personal values, and decision making regarding climate change influences and impacts Identification with and concern for both society and the environment due to impacts of cl imate change Willingness to recognize and choose among differing values and perspectives associated with climate change Sense of stewardship Students change their lifestyle activities and behaviors by: Taking positions and actions based on the best available knowledge to mitigate climate change Taking individual and/or group action through persuasion, consumerism, political action, legal action, and eco management to mitigate climate change

PAGE 21

13 Operational In addition to the above, students are involved with evaluating issues on the basi s of available evidence and personal values/skills used in planning, implementing, and eva luating solutions for climate change including: Using the process skills of scientific inquiry, using the ability to forecast, to think ahead, and plan Imagining, connecting, valuing, and analyzing Using primary and secondary sources of information Using the ability to separate fact from opinion Determi ning the roles played by differing human beliefs and values in climate change Students show affects, attitudes, and values that indicate a valuation of both nature and society Students demonstrate a sense of investment and responsibility for the resolution of climate change Motivation to actively participate in environmental improvement and protection Take into account historical perspectives while focusing on current and future climate change causes and consequences Taking p ersonal responsibility: recogni zes impacts of personal behavior and accepts personal responsibility for climate change impacts Willingness to help correct or avoid the negative impacts of climate change Balancing love of nature with love of humanity Willingness to curtail some individua l short term privileges for long range public and environmental good Perceptual movement from: present to future, society to humanity, isolated phenomena to interacting system s Personal environmental ethics Respects diversity of human perceptions, learning styles, and value systems demonstrate leadership in working toward resolution of climate change problems including: Evaluating their impact on quality of life and environment Actively reducing their carbon footprint and helping those around them to do the same Working to maintain biological and social diversity Continually examining and reexamining the values of culture Making decisions based on beneficence, justice, stewardship, prudence, cooperation, and compassion to mitigate climat e change ( Table 2 Continued)

PAGE 22

14 The conceptual framework of Climate Change Literacy, which is nested within Environmental Literacy, centers on Piagetian theory, where schemas are a key construct that reflect conceptual understanding, as well as how beliefs are formed which greatly influe nces behavior. After all, it is possible to understand the fundamental principles of climate change without believing conceptual discussion examines in det ail the three compon ents of Climate Change Literacy. Climate Change Literacy Component 1: Understanding Piaget considered schemas to be the building blocks of intelligent behavior. According to Piaget (1968), schemas are units of knowledge relati ng to objects, actions, or the abstract that are mental representations of the world. Specifically, schemas are used to understand and respond to situations we encounter (Constructionism). The older a person becomes the more numerous and elaborate their sc hemas are. When a person is presented with a new object, situation, or concept they will either assimilate the new information into their existing schema or accommodate their schema. Assimilation occurs when a person employs an existing schema to deal with the new situation. However, accommodation occurs when existing schemas do not work and need to be changed to cope with a new situation through the formation of new cognitive structures. Intellectual growth occurs through these processes by means of adapta tion (adjustment) to the world resulting in equilibrium. Yet, it is much more difficult to accommodate new schemas than to assimilate information into existing ones. In order for accommodation to occur, new cognitive structures must be formed through cogn However, this intuitive knowledge may hinder the acquisition of scientific understandings (Vosniadou, Ioannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou, 2001; Kyriakop oulou & Vosniadou, 2013). This happens because scientific explanations of physical phenomena often violate intuitive

PAGE 23

15 physics. For example, climate change may not translate to warmer temperatures across the globe as suggested by one of its outcomes global w arming. Consequently, learning science often requires accommodation the reorganization of existing conceptual structures and the creation of new, radically different representations (Vosniadou, Ioannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou, 2001). Therefore, science requires the acceptance that appearances may sometimes be deceiving. Yet Vosniadou, Ioannides, Dimitrakopoulou, & Papademetriou (2001) state the disappearance of earlier conceptions is not a requirement for conceptual change as the old representat ions may continue or disappear. Essentially, this is often how students come to understand the science of clim ate change and increase their Climate Change L iteracy. Climate Change Literacy Component 2: Beliefs People often build their beli efs around social constructs and personal experiences instead of scientific evidence (Schuldt & Roh, 2014; Akerlof, Maibach, Fitzgerald, Cedeno, & Neuman, 2013; Weber, 2010; Weber & Stern, 2011). This is especially true of belief in climate chang e (Schuldt & Roh, 2014). This is due to the influence of stu perceptual tasks and higher order reasoning, no matter the quality of climate change evidence or education ( Cialdini et al., 1976; Balcetis & Duning, 2010 ; Bruner & Good man, 1947 ; Hastorf & Cantril, 1954; Schuldt & Roh, 2014; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Valone, Ross & Lepper 1985 ). For example, political affiliations are Republica n; liberal or conservative) are shaped early in life (Sulloway, 1995) and can be quite stable over time (Jennings & Gregory, 1984; Newcomb, Koenig, Hacks, & Warwick, 1967). Political beliefs can shape information processing at multiple stages (Lodge & Tabe r, 200 5), which influences beliefs including those related to science understandings. Druckman & Bolsen (2011) recently found that related messages. This may shap e beliefs in cl imate change, which is a politically charged issue, as

PAGE 24

16 well as behaviors because beliefs are often translated into action. For example, framing climate change as an economic issue that could slow economic growth instead of a public health is sue may resonate more strongly with political conservatives (Nisbet, 2010). Just as social identities (lik e political affiliation) impact science beliefs, so can personal connections ( or lack thereof) to the science phenomena. This is because beliefs are often built on personal experience s Thus, distance from (or lack of experience with) a concept can decrease belief in that concept. Climate change is a good example of an environmental issue that many people are psychologically distanced from, which decre ases their belief in it. Many students cannot see the impact of climate change on their lives because its influence is not often directly obvious. For se over 50,000 turkeys on their farm in Iowa to avian flu, but an increase in winter temperature s due to climate change is not associated in their minds with the distance from climat e change can be explained by Construal Level Theory (CLT) developed by Liberman and Trope (2 008). CLT outlines four key dimensions of psychological distance: spatial or geographical distance; temporal distance; distance between the perceiver and another individual or group; and uncertainty that an event will occur. Psychologically distant eve nts are abstract high level constructs composed of general decontextualized features. Conversely, psychologically close events are concrete constructs composed of specific contextual details (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Climate change is often pe rceiv ed by students as distant i n all CLT dimensions. Climate Change Literacy Component 3: Behavior The psy chological distance many feel towards climate change decreases their belief in it and reduces their behavior to mitigate climate change. Survey evidence indicates people generally perceive climate change impacting geographically/temporally distant people and impacts are seen as more serious for distant locations (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Several studies also

PAGE 25

17 found that personal risks from clima te change are judged to be lower than other societal risks (Leiserowitz, Maibach, Roser Renouf, & Smith, 2010; Spence and Pidgeon, 2010). Bridging the CLT distance of climate change requires individuals to have personal experiences with climate change. The se experiences m ust break down the psychological distance so people will act to mitigate climate change because they consider it a personal risk and their responsibility (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Specifically, the belief that climate change is an thropogenically caused is a necessary condition (although not sufficient) for realizing personal actions can mitigate climate change (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012). Thus, students need to have personal experiences that illustrate anthropogenic clim ate change in order to shift their beliefs and behavior to mitigate it. Understanding, Beliefs, and Behavior Working Together Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982 from assimilation or accommodation. In o rder for a student to accommodate new scientific con cepts through conceptual change there must be dissatisfaction with existing conceptions, new conceptions must be intelligible as well as plausible, and a new conception must present the possibility of fut ure research or exploration by the student ( Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog 1982, p. 215). ecology) should be utilized when introducing new scientific c oncepts or if conceptual change needs to occur.

PAGE 26

18 Proposed Conceptual Ecology Framework Conceptual ecology is defined by Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog into identifiable conceptions. However I propose to ex tend the term conceptual ecology to r current science understanding beliefs, and behavior. I n this framework, ecology but also the physical s pace that studen ts have educative experiences in conceptual ecology science concepts agreed upon by the international science community are I propose that when students are taught controversial and confusing science concepts (such as climate change) where accommodation is required, their conceptual ecology is not often utilized As a result, students do not fully accommodate the information. frequently not changed so their behavior/actions do not ref lect the new science concepts the y are iteracy is not increased. I also assert that accommodation is more likely to occur when st udents generate their own questions created from their conceptual ecology and researc h the answers. Accommodation is more likely to occur in these circumstances because such research experiences create the cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1962) required fo r students to find dissatisfaction with their existing science conceptions as discussed by Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog (1982). Lastly, when students learn by generating their own questions and answers created from their conceptual ecology they decre ase the psychological distance between them and the concept as suggested by Construal Level Theory Therefore, students are more likely to change their

PAGE 27

19 beliefs and behavior in light of their new conceptual accommodation. This would be especially helpful f or many students. Proposed Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy Below is the initial conceptual model of learning design elements proposed for pro moting Climate Change Literacy It was created through the connections amon g the various conceptual frameworks previously discussed This conceptual model was used overall guide for data analysis where Climate Change Literacy is nested w ithin Environmental Literacy Components of both literacies include understanding, beliefs, and behavior. Understandings and beliefs are high ly connected and both impact behavior. Constructionism was the approach utili zed in this study for conceptualizing stude nt understanding. Construal Level Theory was ut ilized as the approach to understand student beliefs. Figure 2 Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta 2015 ).

PAGE 28

20 The unifying approach that connected anding, beliefs, and behavior was Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog ual Ecology assists them to accommodate higher levels of Climate Change Literacy into their existing schemas. ExEd and PbEd are teaching methods that utilize Thus, c onstructionism, CLT, and Conceptual Ecology were the initial proposed learning design elements that may promote Climate Change Literacy. Conceptual Framework Context By utilizing t he nested conceptual frame works of Environmental Literacy ( Figure 2 ), Climate Change Literacy can be understood In the next section, teaching well as beliefs and behavior) will be reviewed from the existing literature. However, there is limited research on the components of Climate Change L iteracy, especially concerning learning design elements as well as ExEd and PbE d This pilot study aims to contribute such knowledge to the field of science education Literature Review Research on Teaching Climate Change Understanding Global climate change is real and a currently occurring environmental threat that is influenced by humans with negative consequences for generations to come ( IPCC, 2014; Solomon et al., 2007 ; Watson, Zinyowera, & Moss, 199 6). Therefore Climate Change Literacy has become a critical subject to teach and study. Climate Change Literacy within colleges and universities is imper ative for building an info rmed society conscious of climate change (Johnson et al., 1997). This is especially vital for students who are not environmental science majors (McGowan, 2013). Climate Change Literacy in post secondary education is crucial becaus e only 20 states indirectly address atmosphere, weather, and climate concepts within their state K 12 education standards (Hoffman &

PAGE 29

21 Barstow, 2007). Eight states fail to include these concepts in any form as part of their standards. To increase science rig or in K Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were developed by the National Academies Achieve, the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), and the American Association for the Advance ment of Science (AAAS) in collaboration with indi vidual s tates. The NGSS are one of the m ost recent, rigorous, and state accepted science standards. In fact, the NGSS do include climate change for 9th 12th grades within the Earth Space Science Progression: The role of radiation from the sun and its interactions with the atmosphere, ocean, and land are the foundation for the global climate system. Global climate models are used to predict future changes, including changes influenced by human behavior and na tural factors. (NGSS Lead States, 2013, Appendix E, p. 3) These standards are considered high quality, internationally benchmarked, rigorous, research based, and aligned with expectations of college and careers (NGSS, 2013). Yet the NGSS does not state global warming is currently occurring, how it is i mpacting Earth, why it is occurring, or what can be done to reverse the process. Even though the standard does acknowledge that humans influence climate, c limate change is presented as something that may happen in the future. However, this is not adequate to prepare students to make important life choices that impact climate change (Hoffman & Barstow, 2007) The National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (2005) found i nadequate education results in adults who do not understand global climate change, its consequences, and do not know what must be done to reduce its impacts (i.e., they are not Climate Change Literate). These adults are hindered when making important decisions that impact th em and future generation s as well as the natural environment. It is estimated that approximately 80 percent of adults living in the United States are heavily influenced by incorrect or outdated environmental

PAGE 30

22 myths on climate issues (McGowan, 2013) Addi tionally, 67 percent of adults living in the United States think there is concrete evidence of global warming, but only 42 percent attribute the change to h uman activity (McGowan, 2013). Studies show current post secondary education may have l ittle effect on understanding global climate change about climate change. Participants, who were MIT graduate students, believed atmospheric CO 2 could be stabilized by capping emissions at or above current rates. This concept violates basic laws of physics and support s weeney, 2007). This is analogous to arguing that a swimming pool filled faster than it drains will never over flow. For tunately, t here has been some research on effectively teaching climate change. A well executed study was cond ucted by Nam and Ito (2011) that utilized mixed methods to determine the impact of climate change educati content knowledge re garding climate change, geologic time, as well as the relationship between climate and human history. The course utilized active learning focused on group work and projects: The team poster project was designed to fulfill the purpose of improving the stude information literacy in science. The project requires that students demonstrate their knowledge of climate change and human interaction using specific examples, as well as helping them critically think through the evaluation of the knowledge, and fina lly improving their ability to effectively communicate using scientific evidence. (Nam & Ito, 2011, p. 233) A 19 item pre and post test was administrated at the beginning and end of the course. The test consisted of multiple choice items knowledge of climate systems and climate change/human interactions (Nam & Ito, 2011). The content knowledge test had acceptable (Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, 2011). The qualitat ive data consisted of student interviews, classroom observations, and an end of course survey (Table 3 ). The qualitative results were coded into themes (Nam & Ito 2011, p. 235):

PAGE 31

23 1) L earning of scientific knowledge; 2) Improvement of information literacy in science; 3) Changing atti tude and environmental behavior; and 4) Satisfaction of course content, activities, and final team project. Table 3 Qualitative questions and procedures from Nam and Ito 2011, p. 234 235) The method utilized to teach climate change was found to be successful for two reasons (Nam & Ito, 2011): First, by presenting historical and archeological evidence of the interactions between c limate change and human society; climate Interview Questions End of Course Survey Questions Clas sroom Observation Procedures What did you expect to learn about climate change before you took this class? What is the most interesting topic in this class? How do you think about the content structure o f this class? What did you actually learn about climate change in terms of your expectations? How does the team project affect your ability to find and evaluate climate change information and human interaction? Give examples of how this course has changed y ou r thinking about climate change. What do you think is the course impact on your ability to access and evaluate science information about climate change and human interaction s ? Questions were grouped into three categories: 1) B ackground information: demographic background, GPA, major, re lated course previously taken; 2) C satisfactions about the course content, managem ent, course support, etc.; and 3) C ourse impact: improvement of scientific kno wledge, information literacy, and environmental behaviors as a result of taking the course. Each question was composed with sub agreement about the question, which were measured using a Likert scale: 1) S cient ific evidence of climate change; 2) Climate change mechanisms; 3) T emper ature shift and climate change; 4) Geologic time scale; 5) C urrent natural disaster is sues related to climate change; 6) A rchaeolo gical evidence of human history; and 7) C urrent political issues relate d to climate change. Students were asked to write their suggestions and comments for each question. In addition, questions change in their environmental behaviors such as recycling, use of mass transportation, and energy conservation. C lassroom observations were conducted at 1 or 2 week intervals. The researcher made written descriptions during the observations and tried to describe each of the following: Interaction between the instruc tor and students Classroom climate Relevan ce of content knowledge to everyday lives

PAGE 32

24 change knowledge and their critical thinking on evaluating the correlation between climate and human society; literacy by offering students opportunities to evaluate and present their ideas about climate change and human interactions. A previous mixed methods study by Rule and Meyer (2009), investigated high school st strategies as Nam and Ito (2011). The unit utilized active learning, which involved activating background knowledge and group work ( Table 4 ). Table 4 Learning meth odology for the global climate change unit studied by Rule and Meyer ( 2009, p. 341). Day Lesson Activity 1 Stu dents completed the pre test of graph analysis and organism questions. They also place stickers on charts to express their views on statements related to global climate change. 2 Students work ed in small groups of four students each. Each group received a plastic shoebox with 4 organism objects, four graphs, and true/false statement cards. After the activity, students check ed their work with answer keys. 3 Students complete d an exercise on yeast cell population, construct ed a data table, p lot a graph, and interpret ed the results. 4 Students work ed in small group s with another set of objects, graphs, and true/false statements. 5 Students watched The Eruption of Mount St Helens (Graphic Films Corporation, 1997), depicting succession in areas impacted by the eruption. This video provided students with information on ecosystems. 6 Students work ed in small groups with the third set of graphs. 7 Students watch ed and discuss ed An Inconvenient Truth f eaturing Al Gore (Bender et al., 1997) 8 Students work ed in small group s with the fourth set of graphs. 9 Student s watch ed and discuss ed The Lorax by Dr. Seuss (Pratt, 1972), which describes the problems of deforestation. 10 Students completed the p ost test of graph analysis and organism questions. Students place d stickers on charts to express their view on global climate change. A pre and post test were administered to examine student learning gains of climate change through graph interpretation and organism effects. A post survey was also given to understand st survey questions included the following three questions (Rule & Meyer, 2009): 1) Tell three things that you enjoyed about the g lobal climate change activities; 2) Tell three new things that you learned fro m the g lobal climate change activities; and 3) Tell three things you would change to improve the activities. One student responded with Meyer, 2009, p. 344).

PAGE 33

25 Table 5 Student dispositions towards five statements about global warming study ( 2009, p.345). Statement Timing Number of Students R eporting Disposition Mean Score Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree There is a lot of scientific evidence that Pre Test 17 17 30 36 2.9 Post Test 17 9 23 51 3.1 I believe that global warming/global climate change is happening now. Pre Test 11 12 27 50 3.2 Post Test 15 11 16 58 3.2 Global warming/ climate change will not e ffect animals and plants much at all. Pre Test 46 22 15 17 2.0 Post Test 44 25 12 19 2.0 Global climate change will have a good effect on many animals and plants Pre Test 31 17 18 34 2.6 Post Test 32 19 17 32 2.5 Global climate change will have a bad effect on all animals and plants Pre Test 7 12 29 52 3.3 Post Test 20 17 20 43 2.9 Based on the qualitative results, Rule and Meyer (2009) concluded the unit was effective because of student success on the animal/plant models, grap hs representing real world data, and student expression of person al views Even though there were differences in these two studies, the results were similar. Rule and Meyer (2009) studied a unit taught to 100 African American high school students in a large Northern city while Nam and Ito (2011) studied an entire course devoted to climate change taught to 18 undergraduate s at a large Midwest university Active learning was used to teach cli mate change in both studies which resulted in significant stati stical findings Nam and Ito (2011) conducted hi erarchical linear modeling and Rule and Meyer (2009) used a paired, two tailed t test. Both studies found the mean differences between pre and post test scores were statistically significant and there were si post test scores. This indicates on the post test in both studies were below proficiency and standards fo r passing. Rule and Meyer post test score was 61.4 percent Nam and Ito (2011) found the highest student score on the post test was 58 percent

PAGE 34

26 Additionally, ves or impacted their behavior. This may have translated to lower test scores and few changes in their beliefs or behavior. ess specific examples of the connection to how individual life style affects design elements used to teach climate change in these tical analysis indicated. Research on Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Wachholz, Artz, Chene (2012) administered a survey to 375 students from a cross section of disciplines and academic levels at a medium sized university in New England. Forty one percent identified themselves as male. The survey understanding and concern in three areas rel ated to climate change. The first survey section focused on knowledge and attitudes (beliefs) about the causes and likely consequences of climate change. Specifically, these perceived knowledge of climate change as well as understanding of t he greenhouse gas effect and to mitigate c The third section explored student satisfaction with the amount of climate change education t hey received at the university and how it could be improved. Wachholz, Artz, and Chene (2012) found that a majority (75 percent) of students believed climate change was happening and identified it as a human induced environmental problem. This finding wa s also reported by Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach (2010) in their national survey of 271 young adults. Interestingly, most students in this study felt they had a moderate or

PAGE 35

27 extensive unde rstanding of global warming, but the vast majority did not pass the section pertaining to climate change understanding. For e xample, almost all student s could not differentiate the greenhouse effect from ozone depletion with 43 percent reporting the ozone hole was a major cause of climate change (Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, & Mailbach 2010) Additionally, one in three students said there is a lot of disagreement among scientists if climate change is currently as the participants in Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach scientific consensus that climate change is currently occurring. climat e change, their worry did not translate into mitigation behavior. Only 15 percent had taken lifestyle (Wachholz, Artz & Chene, 2012). This is most likely due change is a slow, distant problem unrelated to their present wellbeing. Similar results were also found by Gifford et al. (2009), who found people often believe environmental problems are worse elsewhere and in the fut ure. Interestingly, climate change concern was highest among students with applied professional majors such as nursing, social work, and physical therapy. Concern was lowest among business majors. This coincides with the conclusions of Ewert and Becker (20 01), Hodgkinson and Innes (2001), as well as Karpiak and Baril (2008). Furthermore, concern over climate change differed by gender with over 80 percent of the female respondents very to somewhat worr ied about climate change ( Wachholz, Artz & Chene, 2012) S lightly more than half of the male respondents expressed these levels of concern. Thes e finding were also discovered as Kellstedt et al. (200 8) Each of these studies found women had greater levels of concern about environmental issues, especially with problems inherently harmful to humans.

PAGE 36

28 Lastly, 80 percent of students who identified as liberal or somewhat liberal reported being somewhat or very worried abou t climate change ( Wachho lz, Artz & Chene, 2012) Less than half of those identified as conservative reported these levels of concern. Furthermore, Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, and Mailbach (2010) found liberals tend to be less skeptical about clim ate change and more involved in behaviors that reduce carbon emissions. Kahan (2015) discovered that an individual who identified likelihood of answering climate change comprehension questions correctly on the Ordinary Science Intell igence test ( likelihood of answering correctly (Figure 3) Figure 3 Political identity and science un derstanding (Roth, 1992, p. 12): recent disagree]. Overall, these findings demonstrat e that for students to change their behavior to mitigate climate change they must first believe there is reason for concern. The research indicates students have knowledge of climate change, but not a deep understanding so their beliefs and behavior are not cha nged (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012; Feldman, Nisbet, Leiserowitz, & Mailbach 2010; Gifford et al., 2009). Interestingly, students themselves recognize d the ir need for further climate change education and even suggest ed experiential methods for doing so. Wachholz, Artz, and Chene

PAGE 37

29 (2012) found 54 percent of students said there was not enough information about climate change taught at their university. Students suggested having climate change integrated across curriculum s and disciplines as well as early int erventions for incoming students. Twenty seven percent of students discussed climate change education that would employ experiential methods (like field work) to teach them how to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions. Wachholz, Artz, & Chene (2012, p. Research on Experiential and Place based Education The next step in research is to determine what teach ing design elements most effectively increase students' Climate Change L iteracy, which is a controversial and complex topic I propose that s should be utilized through student generated questions and research as well as personal experi ences where students can touch anthropomorphic climate change to increase their Climate Change Literacy psychological distance to climate change. Experiential Education (ExEd) and Place based Education (PbE d) are possible teaching methods that may assist students in accommodating to higher level s of Climate Change Literacy because these education knowledge and personal experiences (conceptual ecology). ExEd and PbEd also present opportunities for student generated questions and research. This is why ExEd and PbEd are investigated as teaching methods that support the proposed learning design elements to increase s learning) that makes conscious application of the students' experiences by integrating them into the curriculum where experienc 151). Experiential Education requires students to use past

PAGE 38

30 experiences and knowledge to reflect and apply understandings to future experiences. This method experience is to select the kind of present experiences that live fruitfully and creatively in (1938), educative experiences build from favorable growth. This is indeed linked to accommod ation as discussed by Piaget as well as Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gert zog (1982). David Kolb and Alice Kolb built upon the work of Dewy and Piaget through their cyclical model of experiential learning as a multidimensional process (Dunlap, Dobrovolny, & Young, 2008; Efstratia, 2014). In the Experiential Learning Cycle (Kol b & Kolb, 2005), the learner first actively engages in the experience. In the second stage t he learner consciously reflects on th e experience In the third stage the learner attempts to conceptualize a theory or model of what was observed. Lastly, the le arner plans how to test the model or theory for an upcoming experience. Figure 4 The Experiential Learning Cycle and regions of the cerebral cortex (Kolb & Kol b, 2005, p. 195).

PAGE 39

31 In Experiential Learning Theory, learning is not a universal process, but a map of learnin g territories composed from a continuum of learning styles. Experient ial learning is a framework with many different ways of learning which flourish and interrelate with one another the enhancement of experiential learning in higher education can be achieved through the creation of lea r ning spaces that promotes growth producing 205). Growth producing experiences involve the following te n characteristics (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 205 210): 1. Learners feel they are part of a lea r ning community who are known and respected by faculty 2. riences are utilized and valued 3. Learners feel challenged and su pported through the experienc e 4. Learners are given time to construct meaning through talking and listening 5. Learners develop expertise r 6. Expertise means that learners not only have factual knowledge but a conceptual framework so they can apply and transfer their understandi ng and skills 7. Learners are given time t o reflect and test what they have learned 8. Learners conne ct to feelings and emotions 9. Learners link learning to interests which dev elops intrin sic motivation 10. Learners develop meta cognitive skills Such growth cy Place based Education is education that utilizes student for comprehen d ing a range of concepts and their everyday experiences. PbEd is community focused so education becomes more relevant to the lived experiences of students, teachers, and citizens in based education is learni ng that is rooted in what

PAGE 40

32 is local (Rural School and Community Trust, 2005, p. 5). Both Place based and Experiential Education emphasizes hands on/minds on, real world learning experiences to increase academic achievement and life success. Yet Place based Education develops stronger ties to the community and creates a heightened commitment for students to serve as contributing citizens (Sobel, 2004; Smith & Sobel, 2010). Powers (2004) studied the use of PbEd in four elementary and middle school programs by conducting over 100 interviews with students, teachers, school staff, and administrators as well as classroom and school observations. Powers (2004) found PbEd was e specially important for students with special needs and incre ased student motivation for learning and engagement in school. Likewise, Smith an d Sobel (2010) examined a K 8 school i n Portland, Oregon that utilized PbEd to immerse students in the loca l natural environment and to support the loc al community of m igrant families. Students were involved in restoration and gardening projects that root ed them in their in graduates being drawn to environmental fields and political a ctivism (Smith and Sobel, 2010). As illustrated by the above research, many studies that focus on ExEd or PbEd are solely theoretical or antidotal I have not found a strong research study that grounds its method ology and analysis in strong conceptual framework s Additionally ExEd and PbEd are not widely used in post secondary education. experiences, and/or funding to implement these methods/philosophies. I hypothesize ExEd/PbEd may provide opportunities for learning design elements to increase Climate Change Literacy This hypothesis is founded on the evidence that growth based educational experiences can promote accommodati

PAGE 41

33 (Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog validates their past experiences and beliefs through connections to their present and future experiences (Dewe y, 1938). Therefore ExEd/PbEd would likely be good teaching method s that allow for learning design elements that support their beliefs and behavior towards mitig ating climate change This would thereby increase Climate Change Literacy. To test this hypothesis I utilized my conceptual model (Figure 2) discussed earlier Essentially, ExEd/PbEd has the propensity needed to drive students towards accommodation through personal experience. This is where my pilot study fits with in science education literature.

PAGE 42

34 CHAP TER III PILOT STUDY Methods Overview and Research Design I conducted a mixed methods study to address the research question: What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? This study is the preliminary data collection to inve stigate what design elements promote Climate Change Literacy and to inform the development of a conceptual model to direct future course design. This study investigated a susta inable urban agriculture field cour se (Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I) at the University of Colorado Denver, a public urban u niversity. The field course was conducted at an urban farm and included guest speakers wit h related hands on activities. The course culminated with each student completing an independent research pro ject to evaluate and improve current planning at the farm or in the community A c omplex sequence of ExEd/PbEd activities was designed with the intended outcome of changing students understanding and dispositions. Thi s study examined the research question by: 1. Climate Change Literacy ; and 2. Examining why shifts do or do not liefs and/or behavior. This course was selected because it was a primarily undergraduate course that employed true ExEd/PbEd that involved the causes and consequences of climate change.

PAGE 43

35 The quantitative aspect of the study measured any changes beliefs, and self reported behaviors regarding clima te change as a pre/post concept test and survey The pre and post test was designed to determine if student understanding was due to test results enabled me to eptual ecology in terms of possible conceptual shifts in their underst anding. T he pre and post survey identified if students shifted their affective climate change beliefs and/or behavior as well as why The survey also helped determine the impact of stude nts gene rating their own questions and investigating the answers The qualitative aspect of this study utilized a focus group and in person interviews to s and behavioral shifts. These interviews were developed into mini case studies. In addi tion, course observations from 2:00 p m to 5 :00 p m were conducted every Friday September 4 th through December 11 th 2015. Course observations were recorded in a semi structured narrative approach ( Evertson & Green, 1995). All t hese instruments discussed above measure d Literacy before and after the course to investigate w hat learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education This pilot study also helped refine my conceptual model to improve the teac hing of Climate Change Literac y in future courses Setting : Course Description and Location Sustainabl e Urban Agriculture Field Study I focused on invasive species water in the West, land conservation, government management assistance, sustainable grazing in arid areas, ecosystem integration for agriculture, and soil health. The specific course descriptio n is the following ( t he cours e syllabus is also included i n the A ppendix Figure A10 ) :

PAGE 44

36 Students will study topics such as long term farm planning, range management, native/invasive species, water distribution, interaction with the local government, selling in local markets, urban animal husbandry, community relations, four season harvests, agricultural conservation easements, farm land conservation, water, and other issues of farming in the urban environment. As the last of the summer harvest is pick ed, fall is a great time for understanding the farm as an important part of the larger urban context. This field will culminate with each student performing an independen t research project to evaluate and improve on current planning at the farm. (Weaver, 2015, p.1) The course included expert discussions as well as field study where students practice d and applied the above topics. Students also reflect ed on their learning. As the participants interacted with the farm and gue st speakers, they worked in groups to accomplish tasks on the farm such as planting and harvesting sorghum, a drought resistant food stable. Participants grew to trust one another and a community of learners was grown on the farm as well as vegetables. Thus, this course extensively utilized ExEd/PbEd. However, the objectives did not specifically address climate change but it was deeply imbedded in all the topics that made up the objectives : 1. Create a general understanding of the complex of the issues of an urban farm. 2. Experience the levels of city, county, and national infrastructure that affect urban production spaces. 3. Independently review the planning, structure, and interaction of specific systems at the farm. 4. Understand how the [farm] functions interactively with the local urban environment. (Weaver, 2015, p.1) The specific topics discussed in the course are presented in Figure 5 During each class students interacted with a guest speaker and participated in a hands on project at or near the urban For example, s tudents walked the local ditch the farm has water right s to which is located on property S tudents discussed how drought and flood s im pact water rights and the consequences s water allocation (week five) On November 8th students discussed local water rights with Scott Cuth bertson from the Colorado Water

PAGE 45

37 Week 1: Introduction: long term urban farm planning (Aug 23) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 2: UCD Photo Shoot/ Long Term Planning (Aug 30) Mapping the farm Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 3: Invasive Weeds (Sept 6) Reading: Understanding the survey of the farm/Five Acres Speaker: Margaret Paget, Invasive week specialist, city of Wheat Ridge Week 4: Range Management/ Understanding the land (Sept 13) Readin g: Chapters from: The Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 5: Microclimate, drought and long term climate. (Sept 20) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Fred Chambers, Department of Geography UCD Week 6: Water allocation: storm water, fresh water, sewage, and flood plains (Sept 27) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: no speaker Week 7: Urban animal husbandry (Oct 4) Reading: Animal Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lisa Sholton and Curtis Utley, JeffCo Extension Week 8: Topic: Planning for four season growth and sales in local markets (Oct 11) Reading: please check out Colorado Market Maker Speaker: Balancing a farm budget Week 9: Interaction with local government: county/state (Oct 18) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Kaitlin Fischer, Jefferson County Conservation District Week 10: Farm Land Conservation (Oct 25) Reading: nt Speaker: Amanda Nims, Colorado Open Lands Week 11: Small Acreage Management (Nov 1) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Jennifer Cook, CSU Extension agent, Adams County Week 12: Water rights and farming in the state of Colorado (Nov 8) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: Scott Cuthbertson, Colorado Water Commission Week 13: Interaction with local government: city (Nov 15) Reading: Chapters from: Local Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lauren Mikulak, Planner, City of Wheat Ridge Week 14: Topic: TBD (Nov 22) Reading: Project: building/preparing cold frames Week s 15 and 16 (Nov 29): Student presentations Commission. Students then biked or walked the Cherry Creek T rail investigating how their community access es water On week s ten and eleven students learned about lan d conservation and small acreage management. To help illustrate and apply these concepts, students walked the farm s goat s to open space for free browsing in order to combat evasive weeds without the use of pestic ides. Students discussed how to apply these principles to their own property. Even though the objectives for these activities did not specifically include increasing students L iteracy, students discussed increased drought severity, flood frequency and over population of invasive species, which are all direct outcomes of clim ate change. Figure 5 Course schedule of specific topics, readings, and guest speakers

PAGE 46

38 The urban farm sits on over ten acres of land located in Wheat Ridge, Colorado and has a rich history of supporting M etro Denver with local and natural farm to table goods and services (such as goat weed control) The urban farm is also now used as an educational setting for students and community alike to explore sustainable urban agriculture. Figure 6 The urban farm house in Wheat Ridge, Colorado that served as the classroom (Weaver, 2016). Figure 7 ds and fields that served as research sites for much of the course (Marzetta, 2016)

PAGE 47

39 Participants The participants were undergraduate and graduate students from the University of Colorado Denver who enrolled in the course (a convenience sample) At the beginning of the course, after IRB approval was awarded ( Appendix Figure A11 ) students were asked to participate (Appendix Figure A12) Their decisi on did not impac t their course grade in any way. Also, participation in the study was voluntary, confidential, and written consent was collected from participants. In general, students at the University of Colorado Denver are 55 percent female and 39 perce nt members of minority groups The average high school GPA of students at the University of Colorado Denver is 3.4 14) The specific demographics of the participants in this study are listed in Table 6 Typically there are approximate ly 30 st udents that enroll in the course, but only eight students enrolled the semester when the study was conducted. Yet t here was a 100 percent response rate among participants for the pre/post survey and test as well as focus group However only two participants consented to be interviewed Table 6 Self reported p articipant demographics and descriptive statistics. Participant Race/Ethnicity (n=8) Gender F=Female M=Male (n=8) Age in years (n=7) Approximate Yearly Family Income in 1,000s of dollars (n=7) Major and M inor (n=7) 1 Asian F 32 70 BS, Major: Environmental Science 2 Caucasian F 25 140 BA, Major: Chemistry, Minor: Education MS, Major: Environmental Science, Minor: Water Quality 3 White M 29 30 BS, Major: Mechanical Engineering, Minor: Geography 4 White F 22 30 BA, Major: History and Education, Minor: Geography 5 White M 28 40 BS, Major: Biology, Minor: Geography 6 White M 26 15 BS, Major: Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning 7 White F 22 70 BA, Major: Public Health, Minor: Sustainability 8 Sudanese F % or Mean /SD 25% members of a minority group 63% Female Mean= 26.29 SD=3.41 Mean=56.43 SD=39.16 57% BS (pursuing) 43% BA (have or pursuing ); 14% MS (pursuing) 100% STEM Major and/ or Minor

PAGE 48

40 Quantitative Data Instruments and Collection A pre and post Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey (CCBBS) was administered at the change understanding as well as their beli efs and behavior surrounding climate change mitigation Essentially, the CC BBS tested participant s change in belief and behavior ( Appendix Figure A7 ) General quest ion topics are listed in Table 7 The pre and post CCBBS both had 20 closed items and 10 op were composed of items from existing peer reviewed climate change beliefs and behavior surveys The peer reviewed surveys used include d the climate change understanding, beliefs, and behavior student survey by Wachholz, Artz, and Chene (2012) as well as climate change causes, ethics, and belief s survey by Markowitz (2012 ). Please see the Appendix Figures A1 A2 for the s urveys utilized. Th e pre CCBBS only differ ed from the post regarding the questions posed about the course The CCBBS took approximately 15 minutes to complete. The recorded in an excel data sheet for analysis. Table 7 General questions posed t o participants in the CCBBS and purpose for asking them. ( Some post survey items differ ed from pre survey ite ms as participants did not have any course experience when the pre survey was administered .) General Question Topic Purpose for Asking Question What causes climate change? Climate Change Understanding Do humans impact climate change? Climate Change Understanding How do you know the previous 2 answers? Climate Change Understanding Did the course help you to better understand Climate Change? Please explain your answer. *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred Did the course recognize and use your previous knowledge and experiences? *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred conceptual ecology) Did generating your own questions and research help you to better understand climate change? *To Determine How Climate Change Understanding Occurred (focus on students generating their own questions and research)

PAGE 49

41 T o determine if ExEd/PbEd impacted and post climate change concept test (CCCT) was administered. Essentially, the CCT measured change in understanding ( Appendix Figure A8) The CCCT is a combination of the carbon cycle 2011 co ncept inventory (Hartley et al., 2011), climate change cultural conceptual questions by Crona, Wutich, Brewis, and Gartin (2013), as well as climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs survey by Markowitz (2012). The CCCT contained 37 closed items and 10 open items. Information from the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) and Carnegie Mellon University on global warming (Hassol, 2002) was als o utilized to develop questions Please see Appendix Figures A3 A6 for th e concept tests utilized. Questions were selected or created that u nderstanding, especially focusing on common alternative conceptions based on misinformation. These resources have been proven to reliably demonstr ate student climate change understanding by their respective authors. The CCCT is a mix of true/false, multiple choice, and short answer essay questions about climate change. The CCCT takes about 20 minutes to complete and the pre/post tests were identical Student demographic variables were also explored to help explain scores. Student demographic variables include major, age, gender, ethnicity, and socio economic status. Qualitative Data Instruments and Collection In person participant interviews were con ducted responses to the surveys This helped construct the case studies to examine possible reasons why (or why not) students shift ed their beliefs and/or behavior. The interview s lasted approximately 30 minutes and were only conducted with two consenting participants. The interviews were conducted in my office to ensure privacy Interview topics included their climate change understandings, and their belief as well as behavior surrounding climate change mitiga tion. Specific questions were

PAGE 50

42 CCCT. Please see the interview guide in the Appendix Figure A9 for more details. The interviews were audio recorded and verbatim transcr iptions were created in an E xcel data sheet for analysis These interviews became the mini case studies because of the small sample. A focus group was conducted during the course to uncover factor s that influenced participants opinions, behavior and/or mo tivation regarding ExEd and PbEd (Krueger & Casey, 2015, p. 21) A focus group was utilized because I was looking for a range of opinions ideas, and feelings about these teaching methods. Due to the small class size, all of the participants were included in the focus group Participants were asked what type of teaching methods they preferred to learn science concepts with and wh y Participants were also asked if they would take a nother course that utilized intensive field methods. Participants were not le d to any particular conclusion and the terms ExEd and PbEd were not mentioned in the questioning. The focus group was conducted with an open format and there was no specific protocol. The course observations were recorded in a semi structured narrative approach as described by Evertson and Green (1995). I took observation field notes that include d the date/time, focus, context description, running description, and comments. The observations documented ExEd/PbEd, l earning design elements ctions Verbatim transcript ions of the observations were created for analysis in an E xcel data sheet. Figure 8 Observation field notes format (Evertson & Green, 1995).

PAGE 51

43 Quantitative Data Analysis In order to pre and post CCBBS and CCCT the Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted. According to Leech, Barrett, and Morgan (2011), t his test is a non para metric (distribution free) alternative to the paired sample t test. The Wilcoxon signed rank test is conducted when data is not normally distributed or the distribution is unknown. Thus, the Wilcoxon statistical test does not make assumptions about populat ion distribution. Instead, the test ranks the data from low to high and then analyzes the ranks. T he test is based solely on the order in which the observations from the two samples fall. Due to the small sample size the data was not normally distributed This was confirmed by calculating The other assumptions for this test, which this st udy meets, are the following: 1) Data were paired and ca me from the same population, 2) Each pair was chosen randomly and independently, and 3) The data was meas ured on an ordinal scale and were not nominal. The pre/post CCBBS and CCCT were analyzed separatel y by item and by Wilcoxon signed rank test These analyses helped to demonstrate any growth on each item and Qualitative Data Analysis Open response survey questions as well as interviews and the focus group transcripts were analyzed using coding in r elation to the research question To increase rigor and trustworthiness of the findings, two analytic procedures were conducted: constant comparison analysis using both deductive and inductive techniques (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Constant comparison analysis using deductive techniques inv olved identifying themes in the data (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2011) su ch as competency indicators of Climate Change L iteracy First priori codes ba sed on the research question were used for the deductive comparison. Then the constant c omparison analysis using inductive

PAGE 52

44 techniques was performed During this second round of coding, themes and patterns relating t o the research purposes were allowed to emerge from the data rather than searching for specific codes (Patton, 2002). Mixed Methods Triangulatio n Analysis Lastly, the three qualitative data were triangula ted with the quantitative data According to Greene, Caracelli, & Graham (1998), triangulation strengthens the validity of findings because multiple methods offset or counteract biases to assess t he same phenomenon more accurately. This was especially important for the mini case studies derived from the interviews Purpose The purpose of this methodology wa s to investigate what learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and to inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy This research was aimed as ascertaining if utilizing students' conceptual e cology promoted an increase in climate change would indicate they can apply their science understanding regarding climate change. Consequently t he psychological distance between students and this enviro nmental risk would have been reduced. Thus, it may be inferred that s tudents better understand the personal risks associated with climate change and see it as a human induced ethical issue Shifts in conceptual and behavioral outcomes towards mitigating climate change would indicate students have a more complex understan ding of the science surrounding climate change This would possibly indicate an Climate Change Literacy, which is an essential part of Environmental Literacy. When education has environmental relevance for students, when students become convinced of the consequences of their actions, when they value what they are in danger of losing, then Environmental L iteracy may be realized. (Rockcastle, 1989, p. 22)

PAGE 53

45 P ilot Results To address the research question, What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? I gathered and analyzed i nformation from the pilot study. This helped to identify design elements t hat promoted Climate Change Literacy and thus develop a co nceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Lit eracy. I first analyzed any growt teracy by performing statistical tests on the pre/post CCBBS and CCCT as well as coding the CCBBS open response items CCBBS Analy sis: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test D escriptive statistics were run on each closed response question which included the mean and skewness. The skewness was calculated for each closed response question to determine if the dependent variable was normally distributed. If the absolute value of the skewness is less than the absolute value of one, the variable is at least approximately normal. In 18 of the 44 pre and post questions (~41 percent ) the skewness was less than the absolute value of one (skewness va lues less than |1|are bolded in Table 8 ). To determine if there was a statistically significant difference CCBBS a Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted for each question pair since not all the questions had a normal di stribut ion as indicated by the skewness values. The following table lists the mean, skewness value, negative/positive ranks, z value for the Wilcoxon signed rank test and significance for each question pair. The only item that did not have any ranking tie s for question 19, I reduce my use of motor vehicles with five participants decreasing their use of vehicles and two increasing their use. Ideally, on the post survey participants should have decreased their rank to reflect an increase in Climate Change L iteracy on all questions exc ept 21.1 and 22. There was a decrease in rank on ten questions indicating an increase in Climate Change

PAGE 54

46 Literacy on those items (highlighted below in Table 8). T he Wilcoxon signed rank test did not indicate a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response survey questions where p < 0.05. Since a significant difference was not found, the effect sizes were not calculated for any question pair. Table 8 CCBBS statistics (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05 level) CCBBS Analysis: Coding of Open Response Item s Open response survey questions were analyzed using coding in rel ation to the research question Table 9 describes the survey responses. First priori code s based on the research question were used f or the deductive comparison. The second round of constant comparison analysis was performed using inductive techniques where themes and patterns relating to the research purposes were allowed to emerge (Patton, 2002). ope n responses are inclu ded in Appendix Table A2 Question Mean Skew ness Ranks (n = 7) Z value p Q Pre 1 1.000 2.828 = 0 + = 1 1.000 .317 Q Post 1 1.125 --Q Pre 2 1.286 1.230 = 0 + = 1 1.000 .317 Q Post 2 1.375 .644 Q Pre 3 1.286 2.646 = 1 + = 0 1.000 .317 Q Post 3 1.000 --Q Pre 4 1.286 2.646 = 1 + = 0 1.000 .317 Q Post 4 1.000 --Q Pre 5 1.714 2.347 = 2 + = 2 .378 .705 Q Post 5 1.500 1.323 Q Pre 7 1.714 1.784 = 2 + = 1 .816 .414 Q Post 7 1.375 1.951 Q Pre 9.1 1.143 2.646 = 0 + = 1 1.000 .317 Q Post 9.1 1.250 1.440 Q Pre 9.2 1.143 2.646 = 0 + = 2 1.342 .180 Q Post 9.2 1.625 1.960 Q Pre 9.3 1.143 2.646 = 0 + = 2 1.414 .157 Q Post 9.3 1.375 .644 Q Pre 10 2.167 .313 = 1 + = 0 1.000 .317 Q Post 10 1.875 .068 Q Pre 11 2.286 .249 = 4 + = 1 1.414 .157 Q Post 11 1.500 .000 Question Mean Skew ness Ranks (n = 7) z value p Q Pre 12 1.857 .374 = 2 + = 1 .816 .414 Q Post 12 2.125 1.966 Q Pre 13 1.429 .374 = 0 + = 2 1.414 .157 Q Post 13 1.750 .404 Q Pre 14 2.429 .374 = 1 + = 1 .000 1.00 0 Q Post 14 2.375 .644 Q Pre 15 1.714 1.123 = 1 + = 2 .577 .564 Q Post 15 1.875 2.828 Q Pre 16 2.429 .277 = 3 + = 0 1.732 .083 Q Post 16 2.000 .000 Q Pre 17 1.429 .374 = 1 + = 2 .577 .564 Q Post 17 1.625 .824 Q Pre 18 2.143 .174 = 3 + = 1 1.300 .194 Q Post 18 1.625 .824 Q Pre 19 2.286 .249 = 5 + = 2 1.127 .260 Q Post 19 1.675 .824 Q Pre 20 2.500 .000 = 2 + = 0 1.414 .157 Q Post 20 2.375 .824 Q Pre 21.1 2.857 .414 = 2 + = 2 .378 .705 Q Post 21.1 2.875 .277 Q Pre 22 3.857 2.646 = 4 + = 0 1.841 .066 Q Post 22 2.875 .623

PAGE 55

47 In question 6 ( Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? ), one participant shifted from believing climate change is a natural process to believing it is an anthropomorphically induced issue. In the post survey four participants acknowledge d that taking action to mitigate climate change is a difficult endeavor, but fe l t they were obligated to do so for future generations. Three participants still realize d they are contributing to climate chang e and it is their responsibility to help mitigate the issue, but did not focus on their own gains. In response to question 8.1 ( What do you consider to be the top three impacts of climate change? ) seven participants discussed the causes of climate change instead of the impacts of it. When participants were asked, If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? (question 8.2), their responses shifted from resource and marine impacts as well as a general negative influences on future generations to discussing increased land temperatures, specific ecosystem impacts Participants also discussed increase s in natural disasters as well as human disease/suffering. For question 21.2, participants stat ed on the pre CCBBS they needed more information on new technology, affordable sustainability, and general science content knowledge. On the post CCBBS students commented they required more information on new laws and policies as well as ecosystem services and mitigation. Participants commented the y would like more information of opportunities for community and social involvement on both the pre and post CCBBS Participants only responded to questions 23 through 28 in the post CCBBS as the questions examined their experiences in the course. For question 23, ( Did the course help you to better understand climate change? ), a pact on agriculture. Four participants also stated the

PAGE 56

48 course provided them great er local perspective and detailed answer s to their personal questions. Three participants also commented the course helped them to better understand the impact of climate change locally and the influences of their community on climate. When participants were asked, Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experiences? pervious knowledge and experiences by supporting their critical thinking and greater/deeper learning. Two participants acknowledged they a pplied their pervious comprehensions to current environmental and agricultural issues. For question 25 ( Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change?) six participants found creating their own research question helpe d them to discover connections between climate change and human development, biochemistry, as well as green food production. Two participants stated by creating their own research questions they learned about issues not covered in other courses. Of the pa rticipants that responded to question 26 ( Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change? ) four commented that conducting their own research to answer their questions helped them better understand cl imate change This occurred when participants found connections between climate change and water quality as well as self sustainability. One participant stated the course helped to guide their personal interests and life journey. When partic ipants were asked, How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change? (question 27), four responded they wanted more information on climate change. Two participants commented they would like more learning on the connection between climate change and agric ulture. Another participant requested more field trips and time together as a class.

PAGE 57

Table 9 Coding of o pen r esponses for the pre and post CCBBS ( N ot all participants responded; some responses contained multiple codes ) Question Code/Theme # in P re # in Post 6. Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change ? Please explain. Yes, otherwise I am contributing to it/personal responsibility 3 3 Yes, my career 1 0 Yes, obligation to future generation 1 3 Yes, obligation to the environment 1 1 Yes, taking action but difficult 0 1 No, natural process 1 0 8.1. What do you consider to be the top three impacts of climate change ? Please list. Environmental impacts of C limate Change: increased t emps/ severe weather, higher sea l evels etc. 3 1 Human focused impacts of Climate Change: challenges for agriculture, etc. 1 0 Causes of Climate Change 3 7 8.2. If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Please explain. Resource (food/water in general) impacts 4 1 Ocean (biotic/abiotic marine) Impacts 2 1 Ecosystem (biotic/ abiotic land ) Impacts 1 3 Temperature increase 0 1 Increased natural disasters 0 2 Impact future generations 3 0 Increase in human disease/decrease in human health 0 2 Increase in human suffering (in general) 0 1 21.2. If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful? New technology 1 0 New l aws/policy 0 1 Affordable sustainability 1 0 Opportunities for community/social involvement 1 1 Science content knowledge 1 0 Ecosystem services/mitigation 0 1 23. Did the course help you to better understand climate change ? Please explain. Yes, impact of climate change NA 2 Yes, community influences NA 1 Yes, impact on agriculture NA 4 Yes, provided greater local perspective/details to answer personal questions NA 4 24. Did the course use your previous knowledge and/ or experiences? Please explain. Yes, supported critical thinking greater/deeper learning NA 5 Yes, applied previous knowledge to environmental/agricultural issues NA 2 25. Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change? Please explain. Yes, connection between human development and climate change NA 2 Yes, connection between chemistry and climate change NA 1 Yes, connection between green food and climate change NA 1 Yes, learned about issues not addressed in other courses NA 2 26. Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change ? Yes, helped guided my interests/personal journey NA 2 Yes, connection between climate change and water quality NA 1 Yes, self sustainability NA 1 27. How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change ? More on climate change NA 4 More learning around the connection between climate change and agriculture NA 2 More field trips/time together NA 1 28. How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change ? More information on efficiency in land/water/energy use NA 1 How to reduce their carbon footprint through everyday activities NA 2 Increased awareness of resource consumption NA 2 More information on climate change NA 1

PAGE 58

For question 28 ( How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change? ), participants commented they wanted more information on efficiencies in land, water, and energy, as well as how to reduce their carbon footprint. Participants also stated they would like more information on climate change. One participant even mentioned desiring an increased awareness of resource consumption for themselves and others. CCCT Analysis: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test D escriptive statistics were conducted for each closed response question which included the mean and skewness. The skewness was calculated for each closed response question to determine if the dependent variable was normally distributed. If the absolute value of the skewness is less than the absolute value of one, the variable is at least approximately normal. In 14 of the 74 pre and post questions ( ~19 percent ) the skewness was less than the absolute value of one ( sk ewness values less than|1|are bolded in Table 10 and 11 ). To determine if there was a statistically significant difference post CCCT a Wilcoxon signed rank test was conducted for each question pair since not all the questions had a normal distribution. The statistical test was calculated for each closed response question pair to determine if a significant difference was present in any of the questions posed to participants. The following table s list the mean, skewness value, z value for the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and significance for each question pair. None of the Wilcoxon signed rank tests indicated a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response CCCT questions where p < 0.05. Since a significa nt difference was not found, the effect sizes were not ca lculated for any question pair.

PAGE 59

51 Table 10 CCCT s tatistics for questions 1.1 20.a (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05. level). Question Mean Skewness Z value p Q Pre 1.1 1.167 2.449 .000 1.000 Q Post 1.1 1.167 2.449 Q Pre 1.2 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 1.2 1.000 ___ Q Pre 1.3 1.000 ___ 1.000 .317 Q Pre 1.3 1.167 2.449 Q Pre 1.4 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 1.4 1.167 2.449 Q Pre 1.5 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 1.5 1.167 2.449 Q Pre 1.6 1.333 .968 .000 1.000 Q Post 1.6 1.500 .000 Q Pre 2 3.333 .968 1.342 .180 Q Post 2 3.000 .000 Q Pre 3.1 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 3.1 1.000 ____ Q Pre 4.1 1.286 1.230 1.414 .157 Q Post 4.1 1.000 ___ Q Pre 6 1.286 1.230 1.000 .317 Q Post 6 1.125 2.828 Q Pre 7.1 1.143 2.646 .000 1.000 Q Post 7.1 1.125 2.828 Q Pre 8 1.429 .374 .577 .564 Q Post 8 1.500 .000 Q Pre 9 1.000 ___ 1.000 .317 Q Post 9 1.250 1.440 Q Pre 10 1.143 2.646 .000 1.000 Q Post 10 1.143 2.646 Q Pre 11 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 11 1.000 ___ Q Pre 12 1.286 1.230 1.414 .157 Q Post 12 1.571 .374 Q Pre 13 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 13 1.000 ___ Q Pre 14 2.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 14 2.000 ___ Q Pre 15 2.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 15 2.000 ___ Q Pre 16 2.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 16 2.000 ___ Q Pre 17 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 17 1.000 ___ Q Pre 18 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 18 1.000 ___ Q Pre 19 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 19 1.000 ___ Q Pre 20.a 1.286 1.230 1.414 .157 Q Post 20.a 1.625 .644

PAGE 60

52 Table 11 CCCT statis tics for questions 21 .1 33 (n=7; significance at the p < 0.05. level). C omparing Assessments and Aggregated Scores of correct responses ( overall aggregated score ) on the pre/ post CCBBS and CCCT the Wilcoxon singed rank t est was conducted on each assessment separately The following table lists the mean, skewness value, z value for the Wilcoxon signed rank test, and significance for each instrument. As the table below illustrates, a statistically significant difference was not found Question Mean Skewness Z value p Q Pre 21.1 1.143 2.646 1.000 .317 Q Post 21.1 1.000 ___ Q Pre 22.1 1.143 2.646 1.000 .317 Q Post 22.1 1.000 ___ Q Pre 23 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 23 1.000 ___ Q Pre 24.1 1.571 .374 .000 1.000 Q Post 24.1 1.625 .644 Q Pre 25.1 1.667 .968 1.000 .317 Q Post 25.1 1.714 1.230 Q Pre 26 1.000 ___ .000 1.000 Q Post 26 1.000 ___ Q Pre 27 1.847 2.646 .577 .564 Q Post 27 1.750 1.440 Q Pre 28 1.714 1.230 .000 1.000 Q Post 28 1.625 .644 Q Pre 29 1.167 2.449 1.000 .317 Q Post 29 1.000 ___ Q Pre 30 1.333 .968 1.414 .157 Q Post 30 1.000 ___ Q Pre 31 2.000 ___ 1.000 .317 Q Post 31 1.875 2.828 Q Pre 32 1.167 2.449 1.000 .317 Q Post 32 1.000 ___ Q Pre 33 1.667 .968 1.414 .157 Q Post 33 2.000 ___

PAGE 61

53 Table 12 overall aggregated score statistics for the CCBBS and CCCT (n=7; s ignificance at the p < 0.05 level). These results were utilized as background to support the model development. The above quantitative results were encouraging but inconclusive evidence on their own. I next examined why shifts did or did not occur Specifically, mini case studies of one student who shifted their beliefs and behaviors a great deal and one who shifted very little were analyzed Since t he mini case studies are detailed discussions com posed of p articipant interviews, focus group insights, and course observations, the results from these methods as well as the mini case studies are presented in CHAPTER I V: Discussion of Pilot Results Instrument Mean Skewness Z value p Pre CCBBS 51.29 .735 .000 1.000 Post CCBBS 51.50 .854 Pre CCCT 62.71 1.161 1.524 .128 Post CCCT 67.75 .617

PAGE 62

54 CHAPTER I V A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR CLIMATE CHANGE LITERACY COURSE DESIGN After investigating learning design elements suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy, the pilot results informed the development of a conceptual model to improve course design for teaching Climate Change Literacy. The following discusses the res ults, limitations, and conclusions that informed this conceptual model which was revised from the initial model to Discussion of Pilot Results What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design elements inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? was explored through both qu an titativ e and qualitative data. This gave me the unique opportunity of telling the story of what design elements encouraged participants their own words. CCBBS When the CCBBS was analyzed, the Wilcoxon signed rank test indicated there was not a statistically significant difference between pre and post closed response survey questions where p < 0.05. This is also illustrated with only one item (question 19) having no tied rankings between pre and post CCBBS. This qua ntitative analysis paints a bleak portrait of how design elements facilitated by ExEd and PbEd promote student s Climate Change Literacy. However, the portrait is only half complete The qualitative analyses of the CCBBS open ended responses tell a very d ifferent story between pre and post instrument: When participants were asked, Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? one participant shifted from believing climate change is a natural process to believing it is an anthropomorphically induced issue:

PAGE 63

55 Pre CCBBS : Climate change may be occurring, but the world is currently in the thawing process from the last glacial period Post CCBBS : Yes, to decrease my carb on footprint communication, fall, 2015) The ability of the course to induce this incredible conceptual shift is indeed promising as this student increased their Climate Change Literacy from pre nominal to functional. This o utcome also mirrors the findings of Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon (2012) as the belief that climate change is anthropogenically caused is necessary for realizing personal actions can mitigate climate change. This participant realized their carbon footprint was in part responsible for climate change and therefore had a pe rsonal responsibility to help mitigate it Additionally, all the other participants already felt they had a moral obligation to respond to climate change and their belief did not change. This was reflected in results showing no statistica l ly significant difference when the CCBBS data was analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. However, in the post CCBBS four participants acknowledge taking action to mitigate climate change is a difficult endeavor, but felt obligated to do so for future generations. This realization reflects an increase from functional to oper ational Climate Change Literacy : I feel I need to do my part in taking actions such as recycling, conserving energy, trying to use less. But it is still hard to completely cut out driving especially in areas where there is no good public transportation. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) When participants were asked, If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? responses shifted from resource and marine impacts as well as a general negative influe nces on future generations to specific ecosystem impacts, increases in natural disast ers and human disease/suffering. One participant (Participant Two, pers onal communication, fa ll, 2015) Super serious you guys. Food and water sho rtage, rising sea levels, etc (Participant Six, personal communication, fall,

PAGE 64

56 2015) Participant responses on the post CCBBS were more detailed and reflected higher levels of ecological concepts such as carrying capacity ( K ). The five participants realized how future generations would be impacted (increased natural disasters, dise ases) and were more empathetic to both human s an We are reaching our earth's carrying capacity FAST. (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015) This reflected to operational Climate Change Li teracy as their perception moved from present to future, from society to humanity, and from isolated phenomena to interacting systems (Table 2). Essentially, p beliefs surrounding the consequenc es of global climate change shifted from isolated ecosystem impacts (i.e., water shortage) to how systems work together (i.e., how water shortage leads to disease). When asked, If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful? participants (n = 4) stated on the pre CCBBS they needed more information on general science content knowledge and new technology. Participants wanted to know how they could personally benefit from such advances. However, on the post CCBBS participants (n = 4) felt more certain of their science content knowledge and did not discuss being interested in how they could benefit They were also confident in their ability addr ess climate change personally. One participant wrote on t he pre CCBBS Any new technology and advancement that I may not know and can be beneficial to me (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) A participant commented on the post CCBBS, I feel very well equipped to address climate change in my own life (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015) This reflected (n = 4) shift to operational levels of Climate Change Literacy 2). Participants demonstrated a shift from self preservation to environmental preservation.

PAGE 65

57 Interes tingly, participants were concerned about being involved with environmental opportunities and social movements on both the pre and post CCBBS Did this openness for helping the environment impact their growth in Climate Change Literacy outside the course? However, these changes were also seen in Participant 3, who completely shifted his understanding and beliefs. When asked, Did the course help you to better underst and climate change? all participants that responded (n = 6 ) agreed the course assisted them in deepening their climate change understanding: I was already aware of topics involving climate change before this class, but it put more things in perspective an d cleared some questions I was pondering. It was helpful to know about what impacts climate change causes and the community knowledge or lack of information around urban agricultural. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) [The course] a lso provided me with important ways to grow my own food, be aware of complexities of the agricultural system, and be more aware and in touch with our land. (Participant Seven, personal communication, fall, 2015) To understand what learning design elements de participant responses to the following three questions: 1. Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experience? 2. Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change? 3. Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change? All participants that responded (n = 6 ) stated the course utiliz ed their previous knowledge and/ t [the cou rse] let me think critically involving my previous knowledge and apply it to issues around land, water, agriculture and the environment (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) This response documented the course was conceptual ecology ( Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog 1982). However, did

PAGE 66

58 beliefs, and behavior? For seven participants, their understandings and beliefs shi fted to a higher level of Climate Change Literacy, but radical accommodation was not seen as participants were already at the functional level of Climate Change Literacy Yet one participant did experience a radical accommodation from believing climate ch ange was as a natu ral pr ocess to understanding it as an anthropomorphically induced issue Participants (n = 5) also reported creating their own research question and investigating the answer helped them to better understand climate change. One participan t explained how their research question and investigation lead them My research on dissolved organic carbon in the water supply has everything to do with climate change, with concentrations increa sing [i n relation (Participant Two, personal communication, fall, 2015) Another participant indicated her/his climate change understanding increased when s/he researched a self selected question. More importantly the self driven research helped the participant to find opportunities to sustainably support her/his self. Simply p ut, the participant found connections to their real By building a greenhouse it address ed the fact that local food may not be attainable any other way than growing It helped me look at what I could d (Participant Four, personal communication, fall, 2015) When participants create d their own research question and investigate d and social dist ance to climate change decreased. This assisted participants in reaching higher levels of C limat e Change Literacy, which was Construal Level Theory. Lastly, participants were asked t o critique the course in regarding to learning about climate change and how to mitigate it :

PAGE 67

59 1. How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change? 2. How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change? Overall, participants ( n = 6) liked th e I learned a lot of new things about conservation and ecology being tied to urban ag (Participant One, personal commination, fall, 2015) However, one participant I would like to see more being tied to climate change (Par ticipant One, personal commination, fall, 2015) T he course objective s did not include climate change, so this criticism is understandable. Participants felt the course connected climate change to urban agriculture and taught them conservation techniques t This course already goes over valuable conservation methods in urban agriculture, I felt (Participant One, personal commination, fall, 2015) Although participants (n = 6) still hungered for more information regarding e fficiency in l and, water, and energy conservation They also requested more ways to reduce their carbon footpr int through everyday activities and being more aware of resource consumption Additionally, participants desired even Have every lecture on or relate to climate change (Participant Eight, personal commination, fall, 2015) These findings coincide with those of Wachholz, Artz, & Chene (2012 ) who knowledge to become agents of ecological change. Yet did this hands on learning that le d to an increase in Literacy in understanding and beliefs also translate to behavioral shifts? The connection between beliefs and behavior is critical because students are more likely to participant in mitigation behaviors if they have the ability (and belief in their ability) to produce effective change. This coincides with the findings of Clement, Henning, and O sbaldiston (2014) On the pre CCBBS participants all reported recycling everything they could, devoting money to purchasing products th at are environmentally friendly, and rallying for policies that are good for the environment In the

PAGE 68

60 post CCBBS only sev en participants reported recycling everything they could and rallying for policies that are good for the environment. However, seven participants reported reducing their electricity consumption on the post CCBBS and only five participants reported doing li kewise on the pre CCBBS In the post CCBBS all participants again reported devoting money to purchasing products that are actually decreased on the post CCBBS but was still higher than the results of Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, (2012). ( Wachholz, Arts, & Chene, (2012) found 85 percent of students were not participating in any personal action to reduce their carbon footprint. ) Yet when the open responses, focus g roup, interviews, and observations were take n into account participants were not less actively m itigating climate change but more critical of themselves and their actions: This course has taught me many things like how to make my own garden and bat house. I learned so many things by actually doing them at the farm. And I do those things now. existed. I try to make my foot do enough. (Participant, personal commination, fall, 2015) T his illust rates the importance of uti lizing mixed methods as one method explains the other and CCCT No statistically significant increase was found in participant s overall score between pre and post CCCT However, a fter ta king the course participants were more aware of local flooding and its connection to climate change, which is reflected in the post survey responses and qualitative results However, there was not enough of a score incr ease between pre and post tests to b e detected by the Wilcoxon signed r ank test. This was most likely due to the lack of statistical power resulting fr om the small sample size and ceiling effect caused by parti participants were not given enough time to complete the post test so scores did not reflect

PAGE 69

61 To address the research question further, I next examined why shifts did or did not occur in Sp ecifically, case studies of one student who shifted their beliefs and behaviors a great deal and one who shifted very little were analyzed The focus group and observations were also used in this analysis Focus Group and Observations The focus group took place at the farm after class was dismissed. Participants were asked what teaching method ( s ) were preferable for learn ing science and wh y Participants were also asked if they would tak e another course that utilized intensive field methods. All the participants spoke and were in agreement with one another: I like hands on learning. In the field. You know, getting dirty. interactions, it means something personal to me. If I can see, and smell, and touch, and taste something it makes the learning come to life and it sticks with me. I would definitely take another course like this Even though students did not n they definitely described ExEd and why they p referred to learn that way ExEd they could interact with their understanding. This was also observed in the course. Participants literally got their hands dirty and were excited to see concepts tied to practice. Participants even came to a Saturday session to observe how the sorghum they planted as a drought resistant crop could be baked into bread. Participants eagerly took turn baking the bre ad (and eating it). Any technique students cou ld use in th eir lives was closely observed and discussed in su bsequent weeks to determine best practices:

PAGE 70

62 Participant A: Did your bat house work? Participant B: You mean did a bat move in? Participant A: Yeah. Participant B: I think I placed it on the w r ong side of my house. Too hot. (Participants, personal commu nication, fall, 2015) Participants learned that bats could ingest over a thousand ins ects in one night and were keen to decrease their local insect populations in a natural, pesticide free mann er. They also made the connection between an increase in mosquito populations to climate change (i.e., increase in winter CCCT indicated they realized this occurrence though conne ctions made in the course. Inte restingly, all having difficulty counting those courses towards their science degree: is thi s not real science? We are measuring, analyzing, making conclusions about urban agriculture. How is this less science than doing measurements on a glacier? (Participants, personal communication, fall, 2015) Participants were very concerned the course was not being taken seriously by the science department, but did not understand w hy. I suggest this may be due to the marginalization of ExEd and PbEd in post secondary education due to imple m ent these methods/philosophies (Efstratia, 2014). Therefore, ExEd and PbE d are not wel l understood (especial ly in the sciences) and thus not as accepted as traditional teaching methods Mini Case Studies The pre/ post CCBBS and CCCT gave a snap shot into the beliefs and behavior, but did not capture why This was where the observations, focus group, and interviews were utilized to triangulate the findings One participant (Participant Three) was interviewed to further examine why he dramatically shifted his understanding/ beliefs regarding

PAGE 71

63 hu man induced climate change and his moral obligation to respond to it. Another participant (Participant One) was interviewed to further examine why she did not shift her understand/beliefs regarding human induced climate change and her moral obligation to respond to it Participant Three Participant T hree grew up on a chicken farm and later enlisted in the armed forces where he served as a meteorologist. His ideas about climate change were shaped by his work in meteorology and the p olicies of the military: Coming from warming cycle on the Earth and eventually we will go thr (Participant T hree, personal commination, fall, 2015) Yet, why did Participant T change shift? The p articipant was adamant it because he could see it: hand. You get experiences and actually talk to [about] conservation easements to being a sta te engineer or seeing how our water ways have changed in the past twenty years especially since our For me, at least, hands on being outside [is import very visual learner lassroom with a white board I go see the trash in the water, the fertilizer [runoff], then the water reaches Denver on its way to Kansas. You can see how bad that water is. Who wants to eat vegetables that have pesticides inside? icides are there because of all the bugs of climate change. (Participant Three, personal commination, fall, 2015) For Participant Three seeing was truly believing. Ye t did believing impact his behaviors? For this p articipant the ans yes first starting small and then reaching for higher sustainability goals:

PAGE 72

64 I try to use as little electricity as possible. Try to only r un the wash I talk with my wife about what we want to do in five years to reduce our carbon foot print... We want to teach our kids about the world from when we be? We point out observations [to our children] the environment as pristine as possible. Either recycle it or compost it... [Eventually] we vehicles Den of our carbon footprint downtown. (Participant Three, personal commination, fall, 2015) The course also gave this participant tools that le d to community activism to promote sustainability for both the environment and the hu man community: about doing a community garden, but they said no just space for a playground, which I can So [I] will keep talking and maybe they will hear me (Participant Three, personal c ommunication, fall, 2015) increased Climate Change persuasion, consumerism, political action, legal action, and eco management to mitigate climate behavior precipitated a shift in behavior to more effectively mitigating climate change. Participant Three was then asked if place based education was essent i al for learning about difficult and controversial subjects. He first responded by saying no but went on to talk about the importance of a sense of place and application of knowledge: The closer you are to where you lea B ut if you can uproot what you learned to any where you live, it [the learning] goes with you there to would be a negative for you and where you live. (Participant Three, personal communication, fall, 2015) According to Participant Three the more connected to where you learn, the more you care about the learning. If you can apply your learning to where you live, the learning keeps living and growing, which is bene ficial for the participant and for their community as a whole. This is connected to the ntial to Place based Education.

PAGE 73

65 Participant One. While Participant One did not share a great deal of personal background, she did give insights into her thinking and behavior surrounding climate change: to (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) Other than having a deeper understanding of climate change a nd doing more to mitigate it, Participant One was question ed on what else transformed within her climate change understanding and/or be liefs. Her answer was indicative of operational Climate Change Literacy: Student show s affects, attitudes, and values that indicate a valua tion of both nature and society (Figure 2). The health of the environment will only get worse because there will be less and less c lean water, food, and air. Because of that there will be more chronic and acute human diseases. This course made all the environmental information more conne cted to people it started me thinking about the connection between climate change and human development I use to be all negative about people you know understand people more. I care about people and the environ ment. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) Even though Participant One did not show any dramatic increases from pre to post CCBBS or CCCT scores, she discussed significant shifts in her Climate Change Literacy by valuing both humans and the environment. Participant One also increased her behavior in climate change mitigation activities, but wa s much more critical of herself so this was not reflected in her post CCBBS : I garden organically now and teach my friends about it. I watch what I buy even more carefully. But I feel bad about driving so much no good public transportation in a lot of ar eas. I could do better though. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) Lastly, Participant One made certain to credit the put to work my previous knowledge and applied it to issues around land, water, agriculture and the environment at the farm I could see

PAGE 74

66 the plants growing an (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015). Participant One ended with a lament about the course not counting as a science credit: courses like the one at the farm. (Participant One, personal communication, fall, 2015) iential courses and the conflict that ExEd and PbEd often experiences within the science discipline. Limitations of Pilot Study Due to the very low course enrollment and consequential use of non parametric tests, the results of this study are much less gen eralizable than if the study was conducted with a larger sample size. Additionally, there may have been other fac tors that impacted student increases in Climate Change Literacy that were not measured, such as ceiling effect. Ceiling effect occurs when scores are high enough on the pre assessment that it is unlikely to detect any change or improvement on the post assessment. Since participants elected to enroll in this course they alr eady have an interest in environmental sustainability, which increases the probability of the ceiling effect Furthermore STEM major or min ors and all were between 22 to 32 yea rs of age. Only 25 percent of participants were members of a minority group and 6 3 percent identified as female. These demographics were not representative of the university as a whole. The participant demographics may have impacted the outcome of this stu dy by predisposing participants to certain understandings, beliefs, and behavior. It would be ideal to conduct this study on participants repre senting a mix of undergraduate and graduate student s from diverse academic focuses and backgrounds.

PAGE 75

67 Lastly, having a control group who are not involved in the course would be ideal to help control for diffusion of treatment (Campbell & Stanley, 1963) However, this study can still be applied to similar groups of students and is a spring board for additional resea rch on learning design elements that are suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy as well as further refinement of the conceptual model This study also demonstrated the need for mixed methods and how qualitative data can inform the quantitative result s through triangulation and thus lead to more accurate findings. Conclusion s lower sense of personal risk towards the effects of cli lack of direct exper ience with it. When students have a direct experience with the impacts of climate change, it increases their sense of personal risk and thus increases their Climate Change Li teracy. Essentially students are decreasing their psychologic al distance (Liberman & Trope, 2 008) to climate change. It appears more impactful than acce ssing their conceptual ecology. This was observed when this study was compared to the findings of Rul e and Meyer (2009) as well as Nam and Ito (2011). Additionally when participants researched their own questions they increased their Climate Change Literacy though accessing their sense of place These questions stemmed from the cognitive dissonance the c ourse planted in partici pants through learning design elements initiated and su pported by ExEd and PbEd. An example of pa research questions was investigating if organic produce is truly better for human health as well as why organics are priced much higher than non organics that need mo re pesticides and fertilizers.

PAGE 76

68 Experiential and Place based Education are both excellent teaching methods for promoting learning design elements that help students accommodate difficult and often controversial science portant to address through each approach Thus, conceptual ecology can positively impact student understanding, beliefs, and behavior surrounding climate change and its mitigation. Research Product: Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy Conceptual Model As the learning design elements that support Climate Change Literacy emerged from this pilot study it became clear the initial conceptual model (Figure 2) required revising. Figure 2 Conceptual model of learning design elements to promote Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta, 2015).

PAGE 77

69 Therefore I update d my conceptual model by making the separate elements of CLT more explicit and central to the model I focus ed the model three vital learning design elements that p romote Climate Change Literacy (Figure 9 ) These were the design elements participants referenced when demonstrating higher levels of Climate Change Literacy. The L ea rning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy conceptual model is a product of this pilot study and answers the research question, What learning design elements are suited for the promotion of Climate Change Literacy in higher education and do these design element s inform the development of a conceptual model to improve the teaching of Climate Change Literacy? I suggest sense of place experiencing climate change first hand to decrease the psycholog ical distance from the phenomenon and self driven research increas Change Literacy because they all current life Figure 9 Revised conceptual model : Learning Design Elements for Promoting Climate Change Literacy (Marzetta, 2016).

PAGE 78

70 This pilot study provides evidence that the above conceptual model is successful at assisting students in shifting (accommodating) their Climate Change Literacy from non existent to functional (Participant Three) or from functional to operational (Participant One). These learning design ele ments supported through Experiential and Pl ace based Education positively a understanding, beliefs, and behavior as identified by the students themselves: up root what you learned to any where you live, it [the learning] goes with you there to that place. You have to be able to apply it [the learning]. (Participant Three, pers onal communication, fall, 2015) Simply stated, the course allowed students to apply t [The course] provided me with important ways to grow my own food, be aware of complexities of the agricultural system, and be more aware and in touch with our land (Participant Seven, personal commutation, fall, 2015) The following is a n example of how this conceptual model could be operationalized for Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I : S tudents utilize their research results obtained from investigating their own question to create and implement a plan in their community to decrease the area s contribution to climate change. their psychological distance to climate change, as they would be acknowledging its existence where they live. Students would also exercise their conceptual ecology to access previous experiences in their community. Additionally, t his project would help students become agents of ecological change, as was the hope they expressed in

PAGE 79

71 Signifi cance In conclusion, this study investigated what learning design elements are suited for promoting Climate Change Literacy in higher education and developed a conceptual model to improve the teac hing of Climate Change Literacy. Through Experiential and Pl ace based Education three vital design elements were fostered for helping students accommodate new climate change understanding, beliefs, and mitigation behavior. These learning design elements were : 1. psychological distance from climate change ; 2. ; and 3. Student investigation of their own research questions By utilizing these design elements supported in Experiential and Place based Education, this study suggest s students can increase their Climate C hange Literacy which confirms hypothesis Since there are no existing models that discuss learning design elements to increase acy, the importance of this pilot s significant The design elements have been discussed by other researchers but not tied to each another or in relation to Climate Change Li teracy. In addition, the approach of students investigating their own questions is unique to this study. Due to this pilot preliminary evidence (as observed with Participant One), further investigation is warranted to determine if the learning design elements illustrated in my conceptual model can indeed Students becoming Climate Cha nge Literate is the critical first step in making major societal transformations required for mitigating climate change, our most pressing environmental issue that impacts all people and the natural environment (Spence, Poortinga, & Pidgeon, 2012) This ma y begin an answer as Siperstein (2014) hopes

PAGE 80

72 However, course design for teaching Climate Change Literacy or even Environmental Literacy be a new teaching model for science educators who must instruct students on topics that are learning design elements that can be applied to any topic. Furthermore, I beli eve there is potential for this conceptual model to be generalized acr oss different discipline s (e.g. geography, life science, social studies, history, etc.) just as ExEd and PbEd can be used as teaching method s in any academic field. The conceptual model learning design elements are successful at inducing conceptual and behavioral change through accommodation via cognitive dissonance This is because these learning design elements attach onto what students already know and feel (their conceptual ecology and sense of place) and connect it to new understandings presented in a course This makes attachments for students in both their head and heart. Next Steps Additional studies involving larger enrollment courses where climate change is an objective should be investigated to provide a large r empirical test of the conceptual model. Results could be further generalized if participants are representative of a more diverse student population, including those outside of STEM maj ors and minors. Such a study would also measure change learning gains and increa ses in Climate Change Literacy to help determine the accuracy of my conceptual model Moreover I recommend a conversation be initiated in post secondary education about the benefits of utilizing Experiential and Place based Science Education. ExEd and PbEd promote Science L iteracy th e application of science un derstandings and skills in the real world 2 by supporting 2 The three major components of Science L iteracy discussed by Miller (1989) are the following: 1. An understanding of the s cience processes or methods for testing models of reality; 2. A basic vocabulary of scientific and technical terms as well as concep ts; and 3. An

PAGE 81

73 specifi c learning design elements (Figure 9 cognitive gains and affective growth. Specifically, e ducative and place based the relationships and meanings each student attaches to physical spaces (Gruenewald, 2003; Sobel, 2004). Student s positive emotionality towards science is imperative to develop because it inspires their engagement, science identity, emotional a of cognitive understandings (Shen, Yuan, Liu, & Luo, ionality and cognitive growth, E xperiential and Place based E ducation opens science to all students. Climate Change Literacy and mo re generally Science Literacy is imperative for every student because science holds a uniquely powerful place in our society. As stated in the introduction to this pilot study, science opens doors to high paying professions as well as provides a knowledge base for informed conversations with health care workers, educators, and leaders (Barton, 2008). Science also demystifies environmental issues that impact everyday life like air/water quality standards, population density, toxic dumpin g, and building regulations (Barton, 2008). Consequently, understanding science that impacts our present and future is imperative for making critical life choices. Thus, it is essential that educators teach Climate Change Literacy and Science Literacy thro ugh educational experiences tha t are accessible both conceptually and emotionally to all students

PAGE 82

74 Figure 10 The author and Oreo the goat at the urban farm (thanks to the University of Colorado Denver, 2015)

PAGE 83

75 REFERENCES Akerlof, K., Maibach, E. W., Fitzgerald, D., Cedeno, A. Y., & Neuman, A. (2013). Do people Global Environmental Change, 23 81 91. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.006 Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College? San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Publishers. Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science, 21 147 152. doi: 10.1177/0956797609356283 B arton, A. C. (2008). Urban science education: A commitment to equity, social justice, and a sense of place. Studies in Science Education 38 (1), 1 37. doi: 10.1080/03057260208560186 Benjamin, D. J., Cesarini, D., Loos, M. J., Dawes, C. T., Koellinger, P. D., Magnusson, P. K., et al. (2 012). The genetic architecture of economic and political preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109 8026 8031. doi:10.1073/pnas.1120666109 Bor (1997). The gender g ap in environmental attitudes: T he case of perce ived vulnerabilities to risk. Social Science Quarterly 78 ( 4 ), 830 840. Bruner, J. S., & Goodman, C. C. (1947). Value and need as organization factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42 33 44. doi: 10.1037/h0058484 Buckingham, S. & Kulcur, R. (2009). Gendered geographies of environmental justice Antipode 41 (4), 659 683. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 171 246). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Carver, R. (2008). Theory of practice: a framework for thinking about experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 19 (1), 8 13.

PAGE 84

76 Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976). Bas king in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3 366 375. doi: 10.1037/0022 3514.34.3.366 Clement, C. A., Henning, J. B., & Osbaldiston, R. (2014). Integrating factors that predict ener gy conservation: The theory of planned beha vior and beliefs about climate change. Journal of Sustainable Development 7 (6), 46. doi:10.5539/jsd.v7n6p46 Committee on Recognizing, Evaluating, Rewarding, and Developing Excellence in Teac hing of Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology [CTUSMET]. (2003). Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (M. A. Fox & N. Hackerman, Eds.). National Academies Press. Coppola, B. P. (2013). Laborator y instruction: Ensuring an active learning experience. In Svinicki & McKeachie (Eds.), McKeachie's Teaching Tips 277 287 Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. of family, friends, schoo l, and science. Science Education 79 (3), 313 333. Creech, L. R. & Sweeder, R. D. (2012). Analysis of student performance in large e nrollment life science courses. CBE Life Sciences Education 11 386 391. Crona, Wutich, Brewis, & Gartin. (2013). Perceptions of climate change: Linking local and global perceptions through a cultural knowledge approach. Climatic Change 119 (2), 519 531. dev elopment model for transforming introductory Biology and Ecology courses. BioScience, 62 (4), 416 427. David, J.L. (2008). What research says about project based learning. Educational Leadership Teaching Students to Think, 65 (5), 80 82. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education New York, NY: Collier Macmillan. Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication, 61 659 688.

PAGE 85

77 Dunlap, J., Dobrovolny, J., Young D. (2008). Preparing e learnin designers usi experiential l earning. Journal of Online Education, 5(2 ), 1 9. Eaves, L. J., & Eysenick, H. J. (1974). Genetics and the development of social attitudes. Nature, 249 288 289. doi:10.1038/249288a0 Efstrtia, D. (2014). Experiential education through project based learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 1256 1260. Evertson, C. & Green, J. (1985). Observation as inquiry and method. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Hand book of Research on Teaching 3 rd Edition (pp. 162 214) New York, NY: Macmillan. Ewert, A. & Becker, D. (2001). Standing for where you sit: an exploratory analysis of the relat ionship between academic major and environment beliefs. Environment & Behavior 33 (5), 687 707. Festinger, L. (1962). Cognitive dissonance. Scientific American 207 (4), 93 107. Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision, and dissonance Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Fielding, N. G., & Lee, R. M. (1998). Computer analysis and qualitative research Thousand Oaks, CA Sage. Feldman, L., Nisbet, M., Leiserowitz, A. and Mailbach, E. (2010). The climate generation? Survey analysis of the perceptions and beliefs of young Americans. Yale Project on Climate Chang e and Center for Climate Change Communication, Yale University and George Mason University. Geske, J. (1992). Overcoming the drawbacks of the large lecture class. Journal of College Science Teaching 40 (4), 151 154. Gifford, R., Scannell, L., Kormos, C., Smolova, L., Biel, A., Boncu, S. & Uzzell, D. (2009). Temp oral pessimism and the spatial optimism in environmental assessments: an 18 nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology 29( 3), 1 12.

PAGE 86

78 Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research Chicago, IL: Aldine Pub. Co. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Po licy Analysis, 11 (3), 255 274. doi: 10.3102/01623737011003255 Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: a multidisciplinary framework for place conscious education. American Educational Research Journal 40 (3), 619 654. Hartley, L., Wilke, B., Schramm, J understanding of the carbon cycle: Contrasting principle based and informal reasoning. Bioscience, 61(1), 65 75 Hassol, S. J. (2002). Teachers Guide to High Quality Educational Materials o n Climate Cha nge and Global Warming: Top 10 Things You Need to Know About Global Warming. Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, Department of Engineering and Public Policy Carnegie Mellon University & the National Science Teachers Association. Retrieved from http://hdgc.epp.cmu.edu/teachersguide/teachersguide.htm Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game: A case study. The Journ al of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49 129 134. doi: 10.1037/H0057880 Hodgkinson, S. & Innes, J. (2001). The attitudinal influence of career orientation in 1st year university students: environmental attitudes as a function of degree choice. The Journ al of Environmental Education 32 (3), 37 40. Hoffman, M., & Barstow, D. (2007). Revolutionizing earth system science education f or the 21st century: Report and recommendations from a 50 states analysis of earth science education standards. Washington D.C.: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 151

PAGE 87

79 Jennings, M. K., & Gregory, B. M. (1984). Partisan orientations over the long haul: Results from the Three Wave political socialization panel study. American Political Science Review, 78 1000 1018. doi: 1955804 Johnson, D. R., Ruzek, M., & Kalb, M. (1997). What is earth system science? Paper present ed at Remote Sensing A Scientific Vision for Sustainable Development. 1997 IEEE International 2 688 691. Kahan, D. M. (2015) Climate Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Advances in Political Psychology, 36 1 43. Karpiak, C. & Baril, G. (2008). Moral reasoning and concern for the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (3), 203 208. Kellstedt, P., Zahran, S. & Vedlitz, A. (2008). Personal efficacy, the information environmen t, and attitudes toward global warming and climate change in the United States. Risk Analysis 28 (1), 113 126. Klymkowsky, M. & Garvin Doxas, K. (2008 and the Biology Concept Inventory. PLOS Biology 6 (3). doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060003. Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillion, M., & Christy, S. M. (2008). The effects of class siz e on student grades at a public university. Economy Education Review 27 221 223. Kolb, D. & Kolb, A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4 (2), 193 212. Krueger, R. & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus g roups: A practical guide for applied research Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Kyriakopoulou, N. & Vosniadou, S. (2014). Using theory of mind to promot e conceptual change in science. Science and Education 23 1447 1462. Leech, N. L., Barrett, K, C., & Morgan, G. A. (2011). IBM SPSS for intermediate statistics: use and interpretation New York, NY: Routledge.

PAGE 88

80 Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Beyond constant comparison qualitative data analysis: Using Nvivo. School Psychology Quarterly, 26 70 84. doi: 10.1037/a0022711 Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser Renouf C, Smith N. (2010). Climate change in the American m ind: beliefs and attitudes in January 2010 Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, learning, and values Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp. Li, Y., Johnson, E. J., & Zaval, L. (2011). Local warming: Daily temperature change influe nces belief in global warming. Psychological Science 22 (4), 454 459. doi:10.1177/0956797611400913 Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2005). The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issu es: An experim ental test of the hot cognition hypothesis. Political Psychology, 26 455 482. doi: 10.1111/J.1467 9221.2005.00426.X Markowitz, E. M. (2012). Is climate change an ethica l issue? E fs about climate and morality. Climatic Change, 114 (3), 479 495. doi: 10.1007/s10584 012 0422 8 Marzetta, K. (Photographer). (2015, Summer). Near Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah [photograph]. Marzetta, K. (Photographer). (2016, Winter). Urban farm wetlands and fields in Wheat Ridge, Colorado [photograph]. McGowan, A. (2013). Teaching global climate change. Natural Science 5 (1a), 120 123. Miller, J. D. (1989). Scientific Literacy Paper presented at the Annual Meeting at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. San Francisco, CA. Morgan G A Leech N L Gloeckner G W Barrett, K C. (2007). SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Nam, Y. & Ito, E. (2011). A climate change course for undergraduate students. Journal of Geoscience Education 59 229 241.

PAGE 89

81 National Environmental Education and Training Foundation (NEETF). (2005). Understanding env ironmental literacy in America and maki ng it a reality [Online]. Available: http://neefusa.org/resources/publications.htm#neetfpubs Newcomb, T. M., Koenig, K. E., Hacks, R., & Warwick, D. P. (1967). Persistence and change: Bennington College and its students after 25 years New York: Wiley. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by state s. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Nisbet, M. C. (2010). Knowledge into action: Framing the debates over climate change a nd poverty. A. K uypers (Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 43 83). New York: Routledge. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Piaget, J. (1968). Six Psychological S tudies Anita Tenzer (trans.). New York, NY : Vintage Books. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education 66 (2), 211 227. Powers, A. L. (2004). An evaluation of four place based education programs. Journal of Environmental Education 35 (4), 17 32. Rockcastle, V. (1989). Environmental literacy: Philosophy, content, strategies. Nature Study 43 (1 2), 8 9, 22. Roth, C. E. ( 1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution, and directions in the 1990s Co lumbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. Rule, A. & Meyer, M. (2009). Teaching urban high school students global clima te change information and graph interpretation skills using evidence from the scientific literature. Journal of Geoscience Education 57 (5), p. 335 347.

PAGE 90

82 Rural School and Community Trust. (2005). Rural School and Community Trust Ann ual Report 2005. Arl ington, VA. Retrieved from: http://www.ruraledu.org/user_uploads/file/2005_annual_report.pdf Salinger, M. (2005). Climate variability and change: past, present, and future an overview. Climate Change 70 (1/2), 9 29. Schuldt, J. P. & Roh, S. (2014). Of accessibility and applicability: How heat related cues affect bel ief sus Social Cognition 32 (3), 217 238. Seymour, E. & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences Boulder, CO: Westview Press. emotionality of insight problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 107(2), 281 298. Siperstein S. (2014). Teaching climate change. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment 21 (1): 20 21. doi: 10.1093/isle/isu008 Smith, G. & Sobel, D. (2010). Place and community based education in schools New York, NY: Routledge. Sobel, D. (2004). Place based education: Connecting classrooms & communities Great Barrington, MA: The Orion Society. Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M. & Miller, H. L., Eds. (2007) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernm ental panel on climate change, Intergovernmental Panel on Cli mate Change. Spence A, & Pidgeon NF. (2010). Framing and communicating climate change: The effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Global Environmental Change, 20 656 667. Spence, A., Poortinga, W. and Pidgeon, N. (2012). The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Analysis 32 957 972. doi: 10.1111/j.1539 6924.2011.01695.x

PAGE 91

83 Sterman, J. & Sweeney, L. B. (2007). Understanding public complacency about climate change: models of climate change violate conservation of m atter. Climate Change 80 214 238. Sulloway, F. J. (1995). Birth order and evolutionary psychology: A meta analytic overview. Psychological Inquiry, 6 75 80. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7 24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall. University of Colorado Denver. (2014). The University by the Numb ers [data file]. Retrieved from http://www.ucdenver.edu/about/WhoWeAre/Pages/QuickFa cts.aspx Unterhalter, E. (2009). What is equity in education? Reflections from the capability approach. Studies in Philosophy Education 28 415 424. doi: 10.1007/s11217 009 9125 7 Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions o f media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 577 585. doi: 10.1037/0022 3514.49.3.577 Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Des igning learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction 11 381 419. Wachholz, S., Artz, N., & Chene, D., (2012). Warming to the id ea: university stu dents' knowledge and attitudes about climate change. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 15(2), 128 141. Watson, R. T., Zinyowera, M. C., Moss, R. H., Dokken, D. J., editors. (1996). Climate Change 1995 Impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change: scientific technical analyses Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Weaver, A. (Photographer). (2016, June 7). Urban Farmhouse [digital image]. Retrieved from http://5fridgesfarm.com/about us/

PAGE 92

84 Weber, E. U. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 332 342. doi:10.1002/wcc.41 Weber, E. U., & Stern, P. (2011). Public understanding of climate change in the United States. American Psychologist, 66 315 328. doi: 10.1037/a0023253

PAGE 93

85 APPENDIX A. Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey Sources Figure A1. Climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs surveys (Markowitz, 2012, p. 485). Domain Question Response Categories

PAGE 94

86 Figure A2 Climate change understanding beliefs, and behavior student survey (Wachholz, Artz, & Chene, 2012). How much had you thought about global warming before today? How important is the issue of global warming to you personally? ant How worried are you about global warming? When do you think global warming will people in the United States? around the world? Most of my friends are trying to act in ways that reduce global warming. Do you think that global warming is happening? Which comes closest to your views? There is a lot of disagreement among scientists. not happening. Which comes closest to your views on global warming? n activities are not a significant cause Which of the following statements comes closest to your view? it's unclear at this point whether we will do what's needed. behavior; so, we're not going to. sn't happening. If you were to take steps to reduce your personal contribution to global warming, On some issues people feel that they have all the information they need in order to form a firm opinion, while on other issues they would like more information before making up their mind. For global warming, wh ere would you place yourself? I could easily change my mind about global warming.

PAGE 95

87 B. Cl imate Change Concept Test Sources Figure A 3 Carbon cycle 2011 concept inventory (Hartley et al., 2011, p. 70). The trees in the rain forest contain molecules of chlorophyll (C 55 H 72 0 5 N 4 Mg). Decide whether each of the following statements is true (T) of false (F) about the atoms in those molecules Some of the atoms T F Carbon dioxide in the air T F Sunlight that provided energy for photosynthesis T F water in the soil T F Nutrient in the soil T F Glucose produced by photosynthesis T F The seed the tree grew from One carbon enters a plant, it can be converted to energy for plant growth. True or false ? A mature maple tree can have a mass of 1 ton or more (dry biomass, after removing the water), yet it starts from a seed that weighs less than 1 gram. Which of the following processes contributes the most to this huge increase in biomass? Absorption of mineral substances from the soil via the roots Absorption of organic substances from the soil via the roots Incorporation of CO2 gas from the atmosphere into molecules by green leaves Incorporation of H2O from the soil into molecules by green leaves Absorption of solar radiation into the leaf

PAGE 96

88 Figure A4 Global w arming ten most important concepts (Hassol, 2002) Top Ten Things You Need to Know About Global Warming There are a number of widely held misconceptions about climate change, and unfortunately, these are reflected in some of the educational materials available on the web. It is therefore crucial for teachers to educate themselves and their students with accu rate information and be careful not to reinforce common but incorrect notions. The following primer is a good place to begin: 1. Global warming is caused primarily by carbon dioxide from burning coal, oil and gas. Certain gases that trap heat are building up in Earth's atmosphere. The primary culprit is carbon dioxide, released from burning coal, oil and natural gas in power plants, cars, factories, etc. (and to a lesser extent when forests are cleared). The second is methane, released from rice paddies, both ends of cows, rotting garbage in landfills, mining operations, and gas pipelines. Third are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and similar chemicals, which are also implicated in the separate problem of ozone depletion (see #5 below). Nitrous oxide (from fertiliz ers and other chemicals) is fourth. 2. Earth's average temperature has risen about 1 degree F in the past 100 years and is projected to rise another 3 to 10 degrees F in the next 100 years. While Earth's climate has changed naturally throughout time, the cu rrent rate of change due to human activity is unprecedented during at least the last 10,000 years. The projected range of temperature rise is wide because it includes a variety of possible future conditions, such as whether or not we control greenhouse gas emissions and different ways the climate system might respond. Temperatures over the US are expected to rise more than over the globe as a whole because land areas closer to the poles are projected to warm faster than those nearer the equator. 3. There is s cientific consensus that global warming is real, is caused by human activities, a nd presents serious challenges. Scientists working on this issue report that the observed global warming cannot be explained by natural variations such as changes in the sun's output or volcanic eruptions. The most authoritative source of information is the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ), which draws upon the collective wisdom of many hundreds of scientists from around the world. The IPCC projects global temperature increases of 3 to 10 degrees F in the next 100 years and says that human activity is the cause of most of the observed and projected warming 4. There's a differen ce between weather and cl imate. Weather refers to the conditions at one particular time and place, and can change from hour to hour, day to day, and season to season. Climate, on the other hand, refers to the long term average pattern of weather in a place. For example, we might s ay that the climate of South Florida is warm, moist and sunny, although the weather on a particular day could be quite different than that. Long term data are needed to determine changes in climate, and such data indicate that Earth's climate has been warm ing at a rapid rate since the start of intensive use of coal and oil in the late 1800s. 5. The ozone hole does not cause global warming. Ozone depletion is a different problem, caused mainly by CFCs (like Freon) once used in refrigerators and air conditione rs. In the past, CFCs were also used in aerosol spray cans, but that use was banned in the US in 1978. CFCs deplete the stratospheric ozone layer that protects life on Earth from excess ultraviolet light that can cause skin cancer and cataracts in humans a nd other damage to plants and animals. An international agreement has phased out most uses of CFCs but the ozone layer is only just beginning to recover, partly because these chemicals remain in the atmosphere for a long time. (Although ozone depletion is not the cause of global warming, there are a number of connections between the two. For example, many ozone depleting compounds are also greenhouse gases. Some of the compounds now replacing CFCs in order to protect ozone are also greenhouse gases. And ozo ne itself is a greenhouse gas. In addition, while greenhouse gas build up causes temperatures close to Earth's surface to rise, it causes temperatures higher up, in the stratosphere, to fall. This stratospheric cooling speeds ozone depletion, delaying the recovery of the ozone hole.) 6. Global warming will have significant impacts on pe ople and nature. As temperatures continue to rise, precipitation is projected to come more frequently in the form of heavy downpours. We can probably expect more extreme wet a nd dry conditions. In the western US, where snowpack provides free storage of most of the water supply, reduced snowpack will make less water available in summer. Coastal areas will become more vulnerable to storm surges as sea level rises. Plant and anima l species will migrate or disappear in response to changes in climate; New England may lose its lobsters and maple trees as they move north into Canada. Natural ecosystems such as coral reefs, mangrove swamps, arctic tundra, and alpine meadows are especial ly vulnerable and may disappear entirely in some areas.

PAGE 97

89 While global warming will have impacts on natural and human systems all around the world, the largest impacts will be on many natural ecosystems and on people who live in developing countries and have few resources and little ability to adapt. On the positive side, warmer winters will reduce cold related stresses and growing seasons will lengthen. And there will be tradeoffs in some areas, such as less skiing but more hiking; and fewer killing frosts b ut more bugs. 7. Sea levels have already risen due to warming and are projected to rise much more. Many people are under the mistaken impression that only if the polar ice caps melt will sea level rise. In fact, average sea level around the world has already risen 4 to 8 inches in the past 100 years due to global warming and is expected to rise another 4 to 35 inches (with a best guess of around 19 inches) by 2100. The primary reason for this rise is that water expands as it warms. The second reason is that g laciers all over the world are melting, and when land based ice melts, the water runs to the sea and increases its level. Thousands of small islands are threatened by the projected sea level rise for the 21 st century, as are low lying coastal areas such as southern Florida. Of course, if there is any significant melting of the polar ice sheets, the additional rise in sea level would be enormous (measured in feet not inches). This is projected to occur on a time scale of millennia rather than centuries. 8. Sav ing energy and developing alterna tive energy sources would help. Each of us can reduce our contribution to global warming by using less greenhouse gas producing energy: driving less, choosing fuel efficient cars and appliances (like refrigerators and water heaters), and using solar energy where feasible for water and space heat. We can encourage our political and business leaders to institute policies that will save energy and develop alternative energy sources that do not release carbon dioxide. We can pre serve existing forests and plant new ones. But even if we take aggressive action now, we cannot completely prevent climate change because once carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere, it remains there for about a century, and the climate system takes a long ti me to respond to changes. But our actions now and in the coming decades will have enormous implications for future generations. 9. An international agreement known as the Kyoto Protocol has been negotiated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but the US is n ot participating in it. Because of its high energy consumption, the US has long emitted more carbon dioxide than any other country. Because carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for about 120 years, it accumulates, becomes equally distributed around the world, and has global effects. Thus, while using large amounts of energy to achieve economic growth, the US and other wealthy nations have unintentionally burdened the rest of the world with a long term problem. And many negative impacts of climate change are likely to be more severe for poorer countries that lack the resources to adapt. The US has more technological and financial resources than other nations. The role of the US in reducing its own emissions and sharing its technologies with other nations will thus be critical to the success of international efforts to limit climate change. Meanwhile, we do not have to wait for the government to take action. Some companies, governments and individuals have already committed to reducing their emissions of gr eenhouse gases without laws or treaties requiring them to do so. 10. Protecting the world's climate by stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will require enormous r eductions in current emissions. Even if ratified, the Kyoto Protocol in it s present form is only a start and would not be nearly enough to stabilize climate. It is estimated that greenhouse gas emissions would have to be reduced to less than one third of current levels to stabilize atmospheric concentrations. This would require a major transformation of the energy sector. A mix of new and existing energy technologies will be needed to achieve this, including large increases in energy efficiency and renewable energy. Researchers are also developing technology to capture and bury c arbon dioxide thousands of feet underground. Major increases in public and private research and development are needed to make the necessary technologies available as rapidly and economically as possible.

PAGE 98

90 Figure A5 Cl imate change cultural consensus questions (Crona, Wutich, Brewis, & Gartin, 2013, p. 524).

PAGE 99

91 Figure A6 Climate change causes, ethics, and beliefs survey ( Markowitz, 2012, p. 485). Causes : Assuming climate change is happing do you think it mostly by humans; Caused mostly by natural changes in the environment; Caused by both human activities and natural changes; None of the above because climate change happening. Scientific Consensus : To what extent do environmental scientists agree among themselves about the existence and causes of global warming?

PAGE 100

92 C. Study Instruments Figure A7 Pre and Post Climate Change Beliefs and Behavior Survey (CCBBS) constructed by the author. Pre CCBS How much have you thought about climate change before today? Some A little Which do you agree with most? not happening. say. Do you believe that climate change is happening? Which do you agree with most? not a significant cause How important is the issue of climate change to you personally? I mportant important important important important Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? Please explain your answer. How worried are you about climate change? What do you consider to be the top three impacts of climate change? Please list. If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Please explain your answer. 1._____________________________________________________________________________ 2.__________________________________________________ ___________________________ 3._____________________________________________________________________________ ______________ ________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

PAGE 101

93 When do you think climate change Denver/Colorado? States? Now Now Now Which do you agree with most? it's unclear at this point whether we will do what's needed. going to. isn't happening. How much influence do you personally have on minimizing impacts of climate change? Some A little If you were to take steps (or take further steps) to reduce your personal contribution to climate change, it would my quality my quality impact my quality my quality know of life of life of life of life a lot a little a little a lot I recycle everything I can I use only recyclables and reusable products. I devote money to purchase products that are environmentally friendly. I provide support to pro environmental organizations. agree I rally for policies that are good for the environment. I reduce my electricity consumption. agree I reduce my use of motor vehicles. Most of my friends are trying to act in ways that reduce climate change.

PAGE 102

94 Where would you place yourself regarding climate change? If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful? information _______________________________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________________________ _______________________________ I could easily change my mind about climate change. What is your race/ethnicity? What is your gender? What is your age (in years/?) What is your approximate yearly family income (in dollars)? What is your major and minor?

PAGE 103

95 Post CCBBS How much have you thought about climate change before today? Some A little Which do you agree with most? climate change is happening. not happening. Do you believe that climate change is happening? Which do you agr ee with most? not a significant cause How important is the issue of climate change to you personally? I mportant i mportant important important important Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate change? Please explain your answer. How worried are you about climate change? What do you consider to be the top three impacts of climate change? Please list. If nothing is done to reduce these impacts of climate change, how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Please explain your answer. 1.__________________________________________________________________________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________ 3.______________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________ _____________________________________ When do you think climate Denver/Colorado? States? Now yrs. Now Now

PAGE 104

96 Which do you agree with most? are going to do so successfully. what's needed. so, we're not going to. ans can't reduce climate change, even if it is happening. How much influence do you personally have on minimizing impacts of climate change? Some A little If you were to take steps (or take further steps) to reduce your personal contribution to climate my quality my quality impact my quality my quality know of life of life of life of life a lot a little a little a lot I recycle everything I can. I use only recyclables and reusable products. I devote money to purchase products that are environmentally friendly. I provide support to pro environmental organizations. I rally for policies that are good for the environment. y disagree I reduce my electricity consumption. I reduce my use of motor vehicles. Most of my friends are trying to act in ways that reduce climate change. Strongly agree After this course where would you place you rself regarding climate change? If you need more information, why type of information would be helpful? o not need any more information __________________________________________________ __________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

PAGE 105

97 After this course I could easily change my mind about climate change. Did the course help you to better understand climate change? Please explain your answer. ____________________________________________________________________________ __________ __________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ ___________________________ Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experiences? Please explain your answer. ____________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________ ___________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ ___________________________ Did creating your own research questions help you better understand climate change? Please explain your answer. ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________ _____________________ ___________________________ Did conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change? Please explain your answer. agree ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________ ____________________________ ___________________________ How would you improve this course to increase your understanding of climate change? Please explain your answer. How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change? Please explain your answer.

PAGE 106

98 Figure A8 Climate Change Concept Test (CCCT) constructed by the author. Pre and Post CCCT Carbon Cycle and Climatic Background Knowledge Trees contain molecules of chlorophyll (C 55 H 72 O 5 N 4 Mg). Decide whether each statement is true or false about the atoms in those molecules. Some of the atoms in the chlorophyll True False True False True False True False True False True False A mature pine tree can have a mass of 1 ton or more (dry biomass, after removing the water), yet it starts from a seed that weighs less than 1 gram. Which of the following processes contributes the most to this huge increase in biomass? Absorption of mineral substances from the soil via the roots Absorption of organic substances from the soil via the roots Inco rporation of CO 2 gas form the atmosphere into molecules by green leaves Incorporation of H 2 O from the soil into molecules by green leaves Absorption of solar radiation into the leaf Is there a difference between weather and climate? Yes Sometimes No Please explain your answer:_______________________________________ __________ ______________________________________________________ __________ ________ ___________________________________________________ __________ ___________ Causes of Climate Change According to the IPCC, Earth's average temperature has risen about 1 degree F in the past 100 years and is projected to rise another 3 to 10 degrees F in the next 100 years. Earth's climate has changed naturally throughout time. Is the current rate of climate change different? Yes No Please explain your answer: ________________________________ __________ _______ _______________________________________________________ __________ _______ _____________________________________________ _____ __________ ____________ ___________________________________________________________ __________ ___ _______________________________________________________ __________ _______ a. What greenhouse gas is the primary cause of climate change? b. How does this greenhouse gas enter the atmosphere? a. ___________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________ _________ ________________________________ ________________________________________________________ _____ _____ ______ Is there currently a hole in the ozone? Yes No Ozone is a greenhouse gas. Would a hole in the ozone cause climate change? Yes No Please explain your answer: ___________________________________ __________ ____ _______________________________________ _______________ __________ ________ ____________________________________________________ __________ __________

PAGE 107

99 Can current global climate change be explained by natural variations such as changes in the sun's output or volcanic eruptions? Yes No Do asphalt/paved surfaces cause climate changes? Yes No Is population growth a cause of climate change? Yes No Results of Climate Change Are stronger winds a result of climate change? Yes No As temperatures rise precipitation will be ______. less frequent more frequent the same Are glaciers melting as a result of climate change? Yes No Are fresh water sources being improved (less polluted, more available) because of climate change? Yes No Do farmers need less water for crops than they use to as a result of climate change? Yes No Is the food supply made more secure because of climate change? Yes No Is agricultural productivity affected by climate change? Yes No Are natural disasters increasing as a result of climate change? Yes No Climate change is currently increasing sea levels. a. Sea levels will rise only when the polar ice caps melt. b. If False what are the causes of rising sea levels? --OR --If True approximately when will the polar ice caps melt? a. b. ______________________________________________ ___________ ____________ ________________________________________________ ___________ __________ _____________________________________ _________ ___________ ____________ Climate change will cause natural ecosystems to disappear like coral reefs. True False Please explain your answer:_____________________________ __________ __________ ____________________________________________________________ __________ __ _____________________________________________________ __________ _________ Warmer winters will increase the growing season but there will be more insects, bacteria, and viruses. T rue False Please explain your answer:________________________________ ___________ _______ ____________________________________________________________ ___________ __ _________________________________________________________ __________ _____ ____________________________________________________________ __________ __

PAGE 108

100 Mitigating Climate Change Saving energy and developing alternative energy sources can help reduce climate change. True False If we take aggressive actions now (like reducing emissions by 50%) we can completely prevent climate change. True False Please explain your answer:_____________________________ __________ __________ __________________________________________________ __________ ____________ ______________ _________________________________ __________ _______________ ________________________________________________ __________ ______________ An international agreement known as the Kyoto Protocol has been negotiated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Is the US participating in it? Yes No Why or why not? ___________________________________ ____________ ___________ ____________________________________________________ _____________ ________ __________________________________________________________ _____________ __ ________________________________________________________ ____________ ____ It is estimated that greenhouse gas emissions would have to be reduced to less than one third of current levels to stabilize atmospheric concentrations. True False Personal Experience with Climate Change Please answer yes or no for the following questions based on your personal experiences: Is the weather more predictable than when you were a child? Yes No Are winters colder now than they once were? Yes No Are summers hotter now than they once were? Yes No Have rain patterns changed since you were a child? Yes No Are droughts becoming less frequent? Yes No Are floods becoming more frequent? Yes No Are there fewer mosquitoes and other insects than when you were a child? Yes No

PAGE 109

101 Figure A9 Interview Guide constructed by the author. ( Interview questions will be a follow up to the open ended survey responses. Therefore, exact questions cannot be determined prior to Original Survey Question Interview Question Do you personally feel a moral obligation to respond to climate cha nge? If nothing is done to reduce climate change how serious of a problem do you think it will be? Did the course help you to better understand climate change ? Did the course use your previous knowledge and/or experiences? Did creating your own questions help you better understand climate change? D id conducting your own research to answer your questions help you to better understand climate change? How would you improve this course to increase your understand ing of climate change ? How would you improve this course to help you minimize the impact of climate change?

PAGE 110

D. Pilot Data Table A 1 Pre and post CCBBS closed responses for each participant (red font = n ot o perational CCL). (Dashes indicate question was skipped by participant.) Participants Questions 1 2 3 4 5 7 9.1 9.2 9.3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21.1 22 % Correct Scoring Key for Operational CCL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 or 4 4 22 Possible 1 Pre 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 4 50% 1 Post 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 3 1 1 3 3 3 1 41% 2 Pre 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 1 1 2 4 2 4 50% 2 Post 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 4 2 4 3 45% 3 Pre 1 2 3 3 5 4 2 2 2 __ 4 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 3 __ 4 3 23% 3 Post 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 27% 4 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 3 4 4 73% 4 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 77% 5 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 2 4 2 2 1 2 3 4 59% 5 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 2 2 4 55% 6 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 4 59% 6 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 36% 7 Pre 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 3 3 2 1 4 55% 7 Post 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 86% 8 Pre N/A 8 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 4 45%

PAGE 111

103 Table A2 Pre and post CCBBS open responses for each participant. (Dashes indicate question was skipped by participant.) Question Partici pant 6 8.1 8.2 21.2 23.2 24.2 25.2 26.2 27 28 1 Pre Yes, because if I don't enact I feel I'm contributing to it. Extreme Weather, Ecology It will get worse and eventually lead to resource collapse. Any new technology and advancement that I may not know and can be beneficial to me. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 Post Yes, I do. I feel I need to do my part in taking actions such as recycling, conserving energy, trying to use less. But it is still hard to completely cut out driving especially in areas where there is no good public transportati on. Carbon emission, Pollution from non clean burning factories from around the world, Over production and consumption population growth The health of the environment and the ecosystem will only get worse due to lack of clean water, food, and air, and increase in chronic and acute diseases will occur more often. Probably, the overall health of humans will get worse. New laws and policies I was already aware of topics involving climate change before this class, but it put more things in perspective and cleared some questions I was pondering. It was helpful to know about what impacts climate change causes and the community knowledge or lack of information around urban agricultural. It let me think critically involving my previo us knowledge and apply it to issues around land, water, agricul ture and the environment. I just started to think about the connection between human develo pment and climate change. Yes, I think it helped me guide my interest a little better. This course was great at making me visualize what we learn in lecture settings into an actual field application. Although we study land, water, etc. I would like to see more being tied to climate change if that was the direction. I wasn't aware this cour se was supposed to be tied to climat e change, so I didn't expect it. Efficiency in land, water, energy conservation. This course already goes over valuable conservation methods in urban agriculture, I felt it was well put in that aspect. I learned a lot of new things about conservation and ecology being tied to urban agriculture (organic farming). 2 Pre Yes, it is part of my career. I am passionate Heat wave, Droughts/wil dfires, Floods Serious probably our grandchildren live with ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

PAGE 112

104 about pe ople realizing it is happening. change drastically. 2 Post Yes, so my children can live comfortably. Greenhouse gases, car emissions, burning of coal and fossil fuels Pretty serious causing droughts, wild fires, sea level rise, floods, etc. ___ We learned about climate change in a number of various topics including water supply, agr iculture, and soil health. I did have some previous knowledge of climate change, but I definitely learned more through this co urse. My research on dissolved organic carbon in the water supply has everything to do with climate change, with concentration s increa sing with climate change. Researching DOC shows effects of climate change on water quality. Talking about how large scale ag riculture effects climate change and environmental health. A lesson on ways to reduce your footprint through everyday activities. 3 Pre Climate change may be occurring, but the world is currently in the thawing process from the last glacial period. ___ ___ ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 Post Yes, to decrease my carbon footprint Greenhouse gases, deforestatio n It will cause the temps to rise across the globe. ___ ___ ___ ___ [undecipherab le} I would introduce elements that impact climate change. ___ 4 Pre Yes, we all live on this planet and we have a moral obligation to protect i t for us and future generations Industrializati on, carbon dioxide, pollution Very serious. If temps go up in the ocean due to these causes we will be in serious trouble and it could lead to our extinction. ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Post Yes, we all live on the Ocean water levels (sea ___ ___ This course talked about Yes, it helped me reestablish By building a greenhouse it It helped me look at what I Talk about more issues Get a light rail built to go by ( Table A2 Continued)

PAGE 113

105 earth, therefore we all have an obligation to do something. level increases due to temp rises and polar ice caps melting), change of growing seasons (unpredictabl e weather), animal habitats lost (for example the animals in the art ic that their home is melting). climate issues in Colorado that helped me understand more. For example, water/snow in Colorado. my standing on climate change. addresses the fact that local food may not be attainable an y other way than growing. could do to support myself. with climate change. We didn't really deal with that many problems. her (Dr. Weaver's) house. 5 Pre make decision based on their possible effect on the environment Loss of natural habitats, loss of biodivers ity, challenges for agriculture I think that natural ecosystem and agriculture will have a difficult time ke eping pace with climate change. Environmental science and ecology concepts N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 Post Yes, I care about future generations. Population growth, fossil fuels, agriculture Loss of habitat and ecosystem degradation Ecosystem services and ecological mitigation. Crop s are sensitive to specifics. Agricultu re involves a lot of ecology. Yes, because I was able to approach questions that instructo rs may not have explored. Yes, because I was able to thoroughly explore questions that were important to me and my ow n personal journey in sciences. Incorporate questions of climate change to every aspect of sustainable agriculture. Be more aware of use of resource consumption and use of fossil fuels and food production. 6 Pre Yes, as a young person w/relative mental cap acity I Greenhouse gases (cars and cows), deforestatio n, urban sprawl Super serious you guys. Food and water shortage, rising sea Involvement opportunities, social meetups N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ( Table A2 Continued)

PAGE 114

106 feel morally obligated. levels, etc. 6 Post Yes, for future generations' sake. Carbon emissions, deforestatio n, and social ignorance Major coastal flooding, ecosystem degra dation, and species extinction. How to get involved ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 7 Pre Yes, to learn and absorb all that I can about climate mitigation and practices I can employ to make myself a nd educated consumer and human. Fossil fuels (use, drilling, burning), Agribusiness (use or misuse of land), Use of toxic chemical (in plant production) I think we will reach a of the world's resources, and will be unable t o function as a modern society. Alw ays more to learn! Cheap ways to live sustainably. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7 Post Yes, if we all acted on this moral obligation, we could make a significant difference. CO2 emission, development degradation We are reaching our earth's carrying capacity FAST. Natural disasters will humans will suffer as well as animals and ecosystems will fall apart. Always Information and learning is ongoing, but I feel very well equipped to address climate change in my own life. Also provided me with important ways to grow my own food, be aware of complexities of the agricultural system, and be more aware a nd in touch with our land. My interested "green" practices landed me in this class, and now my knowledge is more sophisticated and specif ic. My general opi nions have branched out, an[d] [I now have] a lot of background information (some surprising). Branford redevelopmen t into urban agriculture was topic. ___ More field trips together? See what's going on in Colorado. 2 meetings a week instead of one. CO2 use journal throughout the course, reduce consumption pledge. 8 Pre N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 Post Yes, I think everyone should take account for their action that impact climate change. Vehicles, methane production in animals ___ ___ I was aware of most issues we covered in class, but it was good to learn specific instances. Same as above ___ ___ Have every lecture on or relate to climate change. Same as above. ( Table A2 Continued)

PAGE 115

107 Table A3 Pre and post CCCT closed responses for each p articipant questions 1.1 17 (red font = incorrect, I = incorrect, C = correct). (Dashes indicate question was skipped by participant.) Participant Question 1 .1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 5.a 5.b 6 7.1 7.2 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Scoring Key 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 C. long term/ w. short term 1/faster increase CO 2 Burning Fossil Fuels 1 2 Increase UV 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 Pre 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 C 1/C C I 1 1 I 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 Post 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 C 1/C C I 1 2 C 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 C 1/ I C C 2 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 Post 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 C 1/C C C 2 1 I 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 I 2/I C I 2 2 ___ 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 Post 1 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __ ___ ___ 1/C C C 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 4 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 I 1/C C ___ 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 C 1/C C ___ 1 1 I 2 1 1 1 ___ 1 2 2 2 1 5 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 C 1/C C C 1 1 I 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 5 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 C 1/C C C 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 6 Pre 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 I 1/C C C 1 1 I 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 6 Post 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 C 1/C I C 1 1 I 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 7 Pre ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __ 1 I 1/ I I C 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 7 Post ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 4 1 ___ 1/ C ___ 1 1 ___ 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 8 Pre 8 Post 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 1 C 1/ I C ___ 1 1 I 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1

PAGE 116

108 Table A4 Pre and post CCCT closed responses for each p articipant questions 18 33 (red font = incorrect, I = incorrect, C = correct). (Dashes indicate question was skipped by participant.) Participant Question 18 19 20.a 20.b 21.1 21.2 22.1 22.2 23 24.1 24.2 25.1 25.2 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 % Correct Scori ng Key 1 1 2 Now 1 inc. sea level & temp/ dec. salinity 1 Spring faster/ warmer winters 1 2 Still past gh gas in atmos. 2 Economics 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 47 possible 1 Pre 1 1 1 I 1 C 1 I 1 1 I 2 C 1 2 2 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 60% 1 Post 1 1 1 I 1 C 1 C 1 2 C 2 C 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 72 % 2 Pre 1 1 1 ___ 1 I 1 ___ 1 2 C 1 ___ 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 62% 2 Post 1 1 2 C 1 C 1 I 1 2 I 1 I 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 77% 3 Pre ___ 1 1 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 1 1 ___ ___ I 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 45% 3 Post 1 1 1 I 1 ___ 1 ___ 1 1 ___ 1 ___ 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 60% 4 Pre 1 1 1 C 1 C 1 C 1 1 ___ 1 ___ 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 68% 4 Post 1 1 1 __ 1 __ 1 __ 1 1 __ 2 I 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 66% 5 Pre 1 1 1 ___ 1 C 1 C 1 2 C 2 I 1 2 1 1 2 ___ ___ ___ 68% 5 Post 1 1 2 I 1 C 1 C 1 1 C ___ I 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 77% 6 Pre 1 1 2 C 2 C 2 C 1 2 C 2 C 1 2 1 1 1 ___ ___ ___ 74% 6 Post 1 1 2 ___ 1 ___ 1 ___ 1 2 ___ 2 C 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 77% 7 Pre 1 1 2 I 1 C 1 C 1 2 I 2 I 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 62 % 7 Post 1 1 2 ___ 1 ___ 1 ___ 1 2 C 2 ___ 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 51 % 8 Pre NA 8 Post 1 1 2 ___ 1 C 1 ___ 1 2 ___ 2 ___ 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 62%

PAGE 117

Table A5 Pre and post CCCT open responses for each participant. (Dashes indicate question was skipped by participant.) Question Partici pant 3.2 4.2 5.b 7.2 20.b 21.2 22.2 24.2 25.2 1 Pre Weather -local and immediate d[unreadabl e] o[unreadabl e]; climate -long term observed or predicted occurrence. It is much more rapid than the historic (natural) pattern of change. Source from solar radiation As ozone hole gets bigger, the solar radiation heats the earth directly and causes it to increase in temp. ~100 yrs 150 yrs. Warmer water /sea temp will rise in bad stuff under the sea We need the normal climate pattern to keep these in check Maybe -have to be tested B/c we don't want economic loss :( which it really shouldn't. 1 Post Weather is the short term change in atmospheric state; climate is the long term change in 'weather' or atmosphere It is much more rapid and drastic than the historical data (pre industrial ear) Produced from the earth within the ozone layer, and maybe some from the sun. No, it would trap all the other greenhouse gas, so I guess it would indirectly. Probably in 50 75 yrs. Maybe sooner. As the sea temp rises, sensitive species such as coral reefs will be affected. Because the natural ecological setting has changed/damaged which causes more pests to persist and cause problems. Such pests are controlled by normal/longer cold temperature. The effect of cl imate change has already set in; it might take 30 50 or so years to revers some of the effects. But it is never too late. Air quality would most likely show quicker improvement and water quality might too. But as far as the bigger ecosystems to revert, i t would take longer to do so. Because citizens are lazy and the government is terrified of making the energy industries angry therefore it would affect the economy and the quality of life for the citizens. Energy security is a huge deal when it come s to stab ility in the country's economy. 2 Pre Weather is daily, climate is over longer periods of time and based on location. In human history, the increase in temp is considered high, but over Earth's history there have been much more drastic temp changes. Coal power, electricity, natural gas, cars, fires, rotting wood, farts It heats up the atmosphere, increasing temp. As the polar ice caps melt Droughts, floods ___ There will still be carbon emissions. ___

PAGE 118

110 2 Post weather is day to day in a specific location, climate is worldwide and more prolonged This rate of temperature change is extreme compared to previous heating levels. Burin of coal and fossil fuels It depletes the atmosphere, allowing global warming. Next 200 year s Coral reefs another ecosystem thrive in very specific temperature and conditions. I don't know what to explain. Some effects of climate change have already taken place Yes, because the US recently realized the importance of climate change. 3 Pre Weather is the study of what is happening at a specific place and time. Climate is a study of past events to help decipher weather. Even though our temp should warm more than usual, there's no way to tell if this is different from our last warming period. Industry Without ozone, the UV rays reach the Earth's surface unprotected. 100 200 years ___ ___ ___ Don't know 3 Post Because of greenhouse gases A bi product of burning fossil fuels. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 4 Pre Weather is in "now" and climate in the region. Earth's climate is changing faster due the pollution and such from humans. ___ Because it is letting more gases into the atmosphere They are melting now!! Increasing sea temps are killing coral reefs because they are producing algae blooms. Just like the pine beetle, shorter winters in Colorado have lead double pine beetle reproduction. ___ ___ 4 Post Weather is what is currently going on, climate is within regions. It is happening more rapidly than before. ___ Yes, it lets more gases that are harmful into the Earth ___ ___ ___ ___ Idk. 5 Pre Weather=da y to day, Climate=tre nd in The rate is now faster Combustion O3 acts as a thermal barrier Ice caps can fragment off into the sea dispersing huge Some species are more sensitive to change in the environment. They will persist through more mild winters. Climate changes naturally, we can change the rate of change Don't know ( Table A5 Continued)

PAGE 119

111 weather amounts of water. 5 Post Weather is local and daily. Climate is larger. The rate has increased. Combustion of fossil fuels. It would affect the reflectivity of heat and other solar radiation. Runoff Coral reefs' are sensitive to small environmental changes. Man made climate change. ___ Don't know. 6 Pre Weather is a symptom of climate conditions One percent global increase is enough to change ecosystems. Happenin g at a faster rate than normal. Burning Allows more radiation to reach Earth and increase surface temperatures ___ Already is due to water temp changes (1 2 degrees change). Global warming means more extreme temps in all season, not just hotter. Process has already begun. $$$ 6 Post Weather=in cident, Climate=con dition Increase rate due to human activity. Fuels, cattle ranches, etc. Increase radiation from the sun enters atmosphere. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 7 Pre Climate is a general state of an area, such as alpine tundra, etc.; weather is fleeting It is much more rapid and can be traced to the industrial revolution, factories, etc. Exhaust, burning The ozone protects us from the sun. More sun means climate changes. Change in ecosystems, land eroding into oceans. More water and changes in pH or temperature will cause certain species to die, messing with the ecosystem. Warm, wet climates are a good breeding gr ound for these things No sure at this point, but why would you do nothing? Didn't ratify, Kyoto is also outdated now. Wasn't a higher belief in climate change when countries were signing. 7 Post ___ It is quicker. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ Don't know if we can completely prevent, but we need to mitigate ___ 8 Pre NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 Post Weather is current, climate refers to long term ___ ___ The size of the hole affects. ___ Change in water temps affect coral. ___ ___ ___ ( Table A5 Continued)

PAGE 120

E. Additional Resources Figure A10 Official course syllabus for Fall Semester 2015. GEOG 4460/ENVS 5460 Sustainable Urban Agriculture Field Study I Dep artmen t of Geography and Environmental Sciences University of Colorado Denver Date/Time Fall Semester 2015, Fridays 2:00 4:45 Location: Five Fridges Farm Instructor: Amanda J. Weaver Contact: amanda.weaver@ucdenver.edu Office location: NC3014C (in main GEOG office) Office hours: Tuesdays and Thursdays 12:30 2:00 pm Course Description : Farming in the city site, the Five Fridges Farm, in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Students wil l study topics such as long term farm planning, range management, native/invasive species, water distribution, interaction with the local government, selling in local markets, urban animal husbandry, community relations, four season harvests, agricultural conservation easements, farm land conservation, water, and other issues of farming in the urban environment. As the last of the summer harvest is picked, fall is a great time for understanding the farm as an important part of the larger urban context. This field study course (held at the farm) will include guest an independent research project to evaluate and improve on current planning at the farm. Course Objective s Create a general understanding of the complex of the issues of an urban farm Experience the levels of city, county, and national infrastructure that affect urban production spaces. Independently review the planning, structure, and interaction of specific systems at the farm Understand how the Five Fridges Farm functions interactively with the local urban environment.

PAGE 121

113 Texts Five Acres and Independence: Handbook for Small Farm Management Maurice Kains The Unsettling of America Wendell Berry Schedule Week 1: Introduction: long term urban farm planning (Aug 23) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Week 2: UCD Photo Shoot/ Long Term Planning (Aug 30) Mapping the farm Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty L ife Week 3: Invasive Weeds (Sept 6 ) Reading: Understanding the survey of the farm/Five Acres Speaker: Margaret Paget, Invasive week specialist, city of Wheat Ridge Week 4: Range Management/ Understanding the land (Sept 13) Reading: Chapters from: The Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: none Week 5: Microclimate, drought and long term climate. (Sept 20) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Fred Chambers, Department of Geography UCD Week 6: Water Allocation: storm water, fresh water, sewage, and flood plains (Sept 27) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: no speaker, class dismissed at 3:30PM Week 7: Urban animal husbandry (Oct 4) Reading: Animal Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lisa Sholton and Curtis Utley, JeffCo Extension Week 8: Topic: Planning for four season growth and sales in local markets (Oct 11) Reading: please check out Colorado Market Maker ( website on Canvas) Speaker: Balancing a farm budget Week 9: Interaction with local government: county/state (Oct 18) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Kaitlin Fischer, Jefferson County Conservation District Week 10: Farm Land Conservation (Oct 25) Re ading: Speaker: Amanda Nims, Colorado Open Lands

PAGE 122

114 Week 11: Small Acreage Management (Nov 1) Reading: Chapters from: Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Jennifer Cook, CSU Extension agent, Adams C ounty Week 12: Water, water rights and farming in the state of Colorado (Nov 8) Reading: Examination of water infrastructure maps at the farm, including water rights Speaker: Scott Cuthbertson, Colorado Water Commission Week 13: Interaction with local go vernment: city (Nov 15) Reading: Chapters from: Local Five Acres and The Dirty Life Speaker: Lauren Mikulak, Planner, City of Wheat Ridge Week 14: Topic: TBD (Nov 22) Reading: Project: building/preparing cold frames Week 15: Student presentations Week 16: Student Presentations and Final Papers Due Coursework Students will comment (discussion/writing) weekly on the various systems presented at the farm They will also take part in farm related activities. Each student will present final research project on one system presented at the farm. The projects will incorporate research of local/state/national systems/policy as appropriate and make suggestions on systemic improvements at the farm. Grading Classroom Participation 50% (attendance, discu ssion, weekly assignments) Project Presentation/Paper 50% Late policies Midterms may be made up ahead of time in case of absence, but may not be made up after grades are returned. Late work will be accepted up to one week after a due date, but the student will be docked points for each day late after the due date. Assignments will not be docked in the case of personal or family emergency or work schedule change. In this case, it is the student's responsibility to provide documentation of the issue a nd meet with me to plan appropriate deadlines.

PAGE 123

115 Incomplete Policies, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences -University of Colorado at Denver The following college policy on the awarding of Incomplete grades (IW/IF) was approved by the faculty, and was formerly printed in the Schedule of Courses The CLAS Course Completion agreement is available in the CLAS Advising Office. Incomplete Grades (I W/IF): Incomplete grades (IW or IF) are not granted for low academic performance. To be eligible for an Incomplete grade, students must (1) successfully complete 75 percent of the course, (2) have special circumstances (verification may be required) that p reclude the student from attending class and completing graded assignments, and (3) make arrangements to complete missing assignments with the original instructor. A CLAS Course Completion agreement is strongly suggested. Contacting the Instructor Email : Email should be used to contact me regarding setting up an appointment for office hours or communicating with me regarding an absence. I do not take assignments over email or posted to BB If your absence is a documented emergency your assignment will not be considered late. If something is due and you cannot be in class, I expect you to make arrangements with me or another classmate to get your assignment in on time. My goal is to respond to all emails within 24 hours during the work week. Please do not e xpect an email response over the weekend. Lastly, I will not have a "discussion" regarding class issues over email --if your request requires more than a few sentence response -please arrange a time to speak with me in person. Office hours: This is a ti me when I encourage you to come speak with me regarding grades, class, college plans, etc. If you are unable to come to my posted office hours due to a work or school schedule, please let me know and we can schedule a different time. However, do not expect to find me in my office or be able to meet outside of a scheduled appointment or office hours. Phone: Please do not leave messages on my UCD phone, I use email and office hours as my primary communication. Academic Dishonesty Students are expected to know, understand, and comply with the ethical standards of the University integrity. As members of the University of Colorado Denver academic community, faculty and students accept the responsibility to maintain the highest standards of intellectual honesty and ethical conduct. deceive an instructor or other such person who ma meeting course and degree requirements. Examples of academic dishonesty include, but are not limited to, the following:

PAGE 124

116 A. Plagiarism: ut acknowledgment. Examples include: 1. Word for 2. 3. still using their fundamental idea or theory); 4. Fabrication of references (inventing or counterfeiting sources); 5. 6. Neglecting quotation marks on material that is otherwise acknowledged. Acknowledgment is not necess ary when the material used is common knowledge. B. Cheating: Cheating involves the possession, communication, or use of information, materials, notes, study aids or other devices not authorized by the instructor in an academic exercise, or communication with another person during such an exercise. Examples include: 1. academic exercise or in the submission of academic material; 2. Using a calculator when its use has been disallowed; 3. Collaborating with another student or students during an academic exercise without the consent of the instructor. C. Fabrication and Falsification: Fabrication involves inventing or counterfeiting information, i.e., creating results not obtained in a study or laboratory experiment. Falsification, on the other hand, exercise. D. Multiple Submissions: This is the submission of academic work for whic h academic credit has already been earned, when such submission is made without instructor authorization. E. Misuse of Academic Materials: The misuse of academic materials includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1. Stealing or destroying library or re ference materials or computer programs; 2. 3. Receiving assistance in locating or using sources of information in an assignm ent when such assistance has been forbidden by the instructor; 4. Illegitimate possession, disposition, or use of examinations or answer keys to examinations; 5. Unauthorized alteration, forgery, or falsification; 6. Unauthorized sale or purchase of examinations, p apers, or assignments. F. Complicity in Academic Dishonesty academic dishonesty. Examples include: 1. Knowingly aiding another in any act of academic dishonesty; 2. Allowing another to copy from

PAGE 125

117 3. Distributing test questions or information about the materials to be tested before the scheduled exercise; 4. Taking an exam or test for someone else; 5. Signing another's name on attendance roster or on an academic exerc ise. Students who fail to comply with the UC Denver CLAS Academic Ethics Policy are subject to disciplinary action as set forth by the College policy. For more information regarding the Academic Ethics Committee policies and procedures, please refer to http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/CLAS/faculty staff/policies/HandlingAcademicDishonesty/Pages/default.aspx GE OG 4460/5460, 001 Fall Semester 2015 UCD F 2:00 4:45AM FARM Printed Name_________________________ CLAS Academic Dishonesty Policy : Students are required to know, understand, and comply with the CU Denver Academic Dishonesty Policy as detailed in the Catalog and on the CLAS website. Academic dishonesty consists of plagiarism, cheating, fabrication and falsification, multiple submissi on of the same work, misuse of academic materials, and complicity in academic dishonesty. If you are not familiar with the definitions of these offenses, go to http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/CLAS/faculty staff/policies/HandlingAcademicDishonesty/Pages/Definition of Academic Dishonesty.aspx This course assumes your knowledge of these polic ies and definitions. Failure to adhere to them can result in penalties ranging from failure of the assignment or the course to dismissal from the University; so, be informed and be careful. If this is unclear to you, ask me. I have read and understand the course expectations outlined in this syllabus, CLAS academic policies, and the CLAS Academic Dishonesty Policy. Signed__________________________________ Date: ____________

PAGE 126

118 Figure A11. IRB approval certificate for pilot study

PAGE 127

119 Figure A12. IRB Invitation to Participate You are being asked to respond to this survey because you are a student in ENVS 1342 at the University of Colorado Denver. If you join the study, you will need to complete an in class pre and post survey and an in class pre and post test you to understand climate change The surveys and tests will be used to improve methods for teaching climate change. By responding to the in class survey s and te sts, you are agreeing to participate in this research study. If you would like to participate in a brief interview in addition to the in class survey s and tests, please write your name and email address below. By submitting your name and email, you are ag reeing to participate in the additional interview portion of this research study. Name: __________________________________________________ Email: ___________________________________________________ If you would like to participate in a follow up survey and test in addition to the in class survey s and tests please write your name and email address below. By submitting your name and email, you are agreeing to participate in the additional follow up test and survey portion of this research study. Name: __________________________________________________ Email: ___________________________________________________ There are no anticipated risks or discomforts other than your time commitment to participate in this study. Every effort will be made to protect your privacy and confidentiality when conducting and analyzing the data. If you have questions, you can email Katrina Marzetta, at Katrina.Marzetta@ucdenver.edu ( PhD Candidate ) or Dr. Davis at Alan .Dav Feel free to ask questions at any time. You may have questions about your rights as someone in this study. If you have questions, you can call the COMIRB (the responsible Institutional Review Board). Their number is (303) 724 1055. You have a choice about being in this study. You do not have to participate in this study if you do not want to. Thank you, Katrina Marzetta

PAGE 128

120