Results

1. Global Warming & State Science Standards Barry W. Golden & Dr. Yavuz Y. Saka, Science Education Program, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 32306 Conclusions Given the data reported above, we find that the overall portrayal of GW/GCC in state frameworks is extremely poor, with some exceptions. Those states earning a score of “4” give us models to show other states a possible means of improving their approaches to this important subject. With the vast majority of science frameworks either ignoring or underplaying any possible human contribution to GW/GCC, we argue that the framers may have “missed the point”. That is, to effectively teach concepts of climatic change and causes of it, the concept of GCC must be addressed in its own right, not simply as one of many environmental issues. In addition, we contend that the evidence for anthropogenic causation must at least be a significant part of the discussion. Results The findings are summarized in tables II, III, and IV below. Results indicated a wide variation in the extent to which GW/GCC is dealt with. Eighteen states had no mention of the concepts of climate change or global warming, earning a score of zero. Ten more states only superficially addressed these concepts, meaning that twenty-eight total states earned one of the two worst possible scores. Seven states earned a three, and five states earned a five, meaning that these states had robust standards concerning the subject matter of GW/GCC. The average of all 50 states was 1.43, indicating a relatively weak portrayal of the content overall, and generally without reference to possible anthropogenic causes. Table III: # of states in each scoring category: Introduction-The concept of Global Warming/Global Climate Change has reached a stage of some broad international consensus, in terms of the broader issues that the Earth’s mean surface temperature has increased, and is likely due at least partially to human actions (Oreskes, 2004, IPCC 2007). Meanwhile, a recent trend in science education has seen individual states adopt science standards, curricular frameworks which guide K-12 science teaching(NSES, 1996). The vast majority of these states (over 80 %,) have either instituted or heavily revised their science standards since the year 2000. Given that the time-frame of the standards movements coincides with the rise to prominence of GW/GCC, it is of interest to note the extent to which the state science frameworks address the issue of climatic change. This research reports the results of just such an analysis of state science standards. Table II: Sample of Analysis Methods (continued) Literature cited Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007). IPCC, 2007: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate change 2007: The Physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Avery, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds)]. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change.(beyond the ivory tower)Science,Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1686. Southerland, S.A., Smith, L. K., Sowell, S., & Kittleson, J. (2007). Resisting unlearning: Understanding science education’s response to the United State’s national accountability movement. Review of Research in Education,31(4), 45-77. Individual State Science Frameworks Methods-Each of the 50 states’ science frameworks were analyzed for GW/GCC content. We focused on those frameworks for grades 6 and above. Once the framework was opened, a word search was performed, focusing upon the key concepts of “global warming”, climate change”, “greenhouse effect”, and “anthropogenic causes of climate change”. While conducting this search, we noted the number of times the concepts of global warming, climate change, and the greenhouse effect were invoked. Additionally, we qualitatively analyzed the search results, using a five point scale, as detailed in Table I: Table I: Analysis Framework for Standards Table IV: Number of States Reporting each GCC aspect: For further information Please contact us via email: bgolden@fsu.edu yys3536@fsu.edu For access to this poster and associated paper, please visit: http://ret.fsu.edu/papers_09.html