Multidisciplinary Climate Change Education: Determining Effectiveness Through Comparative Analysis

Abstract

Climate Change Education (CCE) is one of the most widely-recognized mitigative solutions to the climate crisis, but research suggests that most global and national CCE policies and curricula are ineffective. A reason for this is that existing CCE curriculum consists of purely science-based pedagogy, despite the fact that multiple studies suggest that a multidisciplinary approach—involving humanities and the arts rather than just science—would be more effective. A case study was conducted at a select California high school, and compared the effectiveness of multidisciplinary CCE to the existing, science-focused CCE, in terms of Climate Literacy (CL) outcomes in students. CL encompasses climate change knowledge, credibility assessment skills, communication skills, and climate-related behavior, four factors that are important determinants when evaluating CCE effectiveness. Using survey research and structured interviews, the CL of students who took 3 or greater Advanced Placement (AP) courses was compared to that of students who took less than 3 such courses. Involvement in Advanced Placement (AP) classes, college-level classes offered to students by the College Board, was used as an indicator of being exposed to multidisciplinary CCE, and was compared to the effects of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) which are currently in use in California. The research found that CL within students was significantly greater in AP students in terms of climate change knowledge, credibility assessment, and communication; but climate-related behavior was low in both groups of students and did not seem to be affected by educational curriculum.