Climate confusion among U.S. teachers

Source: Climate confusion among U.S. teachers | Science

. . . We examine how this societal debate affects science classrooms and find that, whereas most U.S. science teachers include climate science in their courses, their insufficient grasp of the science may hinder effective teaching. Mirroring some actors in the societal debate over climate change, many teachers repeat scientifically unsupported claims in class. Greater attention to teachers' knowledge, but also values, is critical.

. . . Working from a commercial database of 3.9 million teachers, we drew a stratified probability sample of 5000 names and implemented a multiple-contact paper and Web survey protocol during academic year 2014–15. We collected data from 1500 public middle- and high-school science teachers from all 50 U.S. states, representative of the population of science teachers in terms of school size, student socioeconomic status, and community economic and political characteristics. See supplemental materials (SM) for details.
. . ..
First, teachers might experience overt pressure from parents, community leaders, or school administrators not to teach climate change. Only 4.4% of teachers reported such pressure (6.1% reported pressure to teach it, mostly from fellow teachers).
. . .
Second, teachers also may not be very knowledgeable about a wide range of evidence—e.g., CO2 measurements from ice cores and from direct measures at Mauna Loa—and how climate models work. Given the relative novelty of the topic in classrooms, instructional materials, and preservice training, this would not be surprising,
. . .
Third, many teachers are unaware of the extent of scientific agreement. This is critical because we might expect that, with limited technical mastery, teachers may defer to scientific expertise. Yet, when asked “what proportion of climate scientists think that global warming is caused mostly by human activities?”—only 30% of middle-school and 45% of high-school science teachers selected the correct option of “81 to 100%.”
. . .​

It may be interesting to replicate their survey with the PriusChat community. However, most here are not that shy.

Bob Wilson

​

 

Funnily enough, my self-studies have provided technical details but not changed the broad sweep of what I knew before. Of course my understanding dates from the 1960s and the earliest Venus missions. My studies have in effect added precision to my earlier understanding and more technical details.

Bob Wilson

 

What I found interesting is:

POLITICS AND IDENTITY THREAT.

Content knowledge is not the only area in need of attention. Rejection of sound scientific conclusions is often rooted in value commitments rather than ignorance (16), and science teachers are not immune from this tendency.

A question measuring political ideology was a more powerful predictor of teachers’ classroom approach than any measure of
education or content knowledge, with those leaning toward “It’s not the government’s business to protect people from themselves” most willing to teach “both sides” (table S8). Our data suggest that, especially for political or cultural conservatives, simply offering teachers more traditional science education may not lead to better classroom practice.. . .
​

We been discussing climate change or global warming or hockey sticks here for some time and what holds with teachers applies to our own discussions. So it was and remains easy for me to put @mojo on my ignore list because empirical data has no effect. Worse, @mojo simply posts more noise copied and pasted from other sources. Noise that @mojo is incapable of defending. So I've turned up the squelch and moved on to interesting areas.

As for others, to the degree they bring useful, empirical data, good on them and I'll read their posts . . . even if sprinkled with "giberish." It is easy enough to filter out the nonsense as long as there is the occasional acorn. <grins>

This article focuses on K-12 teachers and their resources. Thinking back to my days, I remember really learning from the books and the instructors were useful for answering questions and pacing the materials. The tests, quizzes, and homework were more evidence of progress through the book(s) than anything else. So there were some good, bad, and ugly teachers and gosh darn, they put their clothes on one leg at a time too.

So I'm not so interested in trying to make schools into "indoctrination" centers although many try that including the Texas school book board. As long as the kids learn to read and have a library or "Mr Google," they will be fine.

Bob Wilson