Secondary science teachers' views on climate change education in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As effects of climate change continue to manifest in serious impacts on human and non-human health and well-being globally, there is the urgent need for research into this climate crisis through an education lens. This necessarily implicates how teachers understand the issues involving climate change and the nature of climate change discourses in which they engage their students. Hence this study investigated secondary school science teachers’ views on climate change and how it is framed or should be framed within secondary school science curriculum and instruction. Investigating science teachers’ views is very important due to the fact that climate change is not sufficiently addressed in many secondary school science curricula and especially in the British Columbia Ministry of Education curriculum. Thus, by employing a qualitative interview method approach, six practising BC secondary science teachers were recruited to participate in a study that sought their views on climate change through a series of semi-structured interviews. The interview data were analysed resulting in key themes that characterised the teachers’ understanding of climate change and related issues and how they taught it. The key themes included: 1) participating teachers’ perspectives on climate change as shaped by their own experiences, their students and society; 2) participating teachers’ assessment of the current BC secondary science curriculum to be lacking on the methodology to teach and structure climate change content; 3) participating teachers’ views that enhancing student experiential and propositional knowledge on climate is the best way to effect change; and 4) participating teachers’ views that climate change topic is best understood by the students when it is taught through place-based pedagogies with an interdisciplinary approach of which science is a part. The study’s findings have implications on how climate change topic and discourses can be framed in the local BC curricula including secondary school science curriculum and instruction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".