[Guest Post] Climate models in K-12 curriculum: A 21st century must?

Morgan Brown-Yarker is a Ph.D. candidate in Science Education at the University of Iowa. She received an M.S. in Atmospheric Science from the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. Morgan uses her experience as an atmospheric scientist and mesoscale modeler to educate learners (of all ages) on understanding computer and science models.


An increasing number of Americans are skeptical about the impact climate change has on society. A recent Gallup Poll found that 67% of Americans believe that climate change is not a serious threat; and that only half (50%) of Americans are convinced that anthropogenic forces are the main cause for climate change. This is despite the most recent Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, which clearly states: 

“The observed increase in global temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations… Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including ocean warming, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns” (IPCC, 2007). 

The American public's misinformation continues to rise (bottom) along with  global temperatures (bottom). Note the  scale difference on the x-axis.

Why are so many Americans skeptical about scientific claims such as those stated in the IPCC report? A big part of the public’s skepticism stems from the inability to understand scientific information. In climate science, the majority of our work is done using complex computer models to simulate or project a variety of scenarios. Each scenario is different (but equally plausible!) and is based on our best, most current understanding of earth and atmospheric processes. The problem is that, in schools, students are often taught science as a body of knowledge with very little emphasis on where that knowledge came from. In order to increase our nation's scientific literacy we must enhance science curriculums with less scientific "facts" and more training on the scientific process, which involves asking questions, solving problems, and thinking critically. This doesn't mean that every K-12 student should be educated as though they are “scientists in training”. However, too many students leave their K-12 schooling with the wrong idea about what science is, how it is done, and what its purpose is. The result is a public that can be led to believe that climate change is exaggerated despite overwhelming scientific evidence. 

Although this may seem like more work for already overworked educators, the idea is to make model thinking not a mere initiative (e.g. models week), rather include model thinking as a component of science education. According to the National Science Education Standards, the nature of models, scientific explanation, and use of scientific evidence should be taught as a part of the Content Standard: Unifying Concepts and Processes (NRC, 1996). A science education that focuses on critical thinking and problem solving is becoming an urgent need as an astounding number of high school and college students are graduating without: "significant gains in critical thinking, analytical reasoning, and written communications"

So how can we realistically include science models into the curriculum? First, it is important to note that computer models are only one example of science models. Many tools that are already used in the classroom, such as physical objects, drawings, and math equations, etc. can also be considered models. There are three characteristics that allow these tools to be models, and they are the three characteristics I sincerely hope all school students learn about climate models (if nothing else) merely for the sake of becoming informed citizens: Climate models are a representation that explain a natural phenomenon and allow us to make projections (or predictions).

1. Climate models are a representation of the science community’s best understanding of how the atmosphere behaves. Climate models are not perfect replications- and they likely never will be. Any climate projection (or weather forecast) is very unlikely to provide a detailed and exact projection simply because we do not have the computer power to detect every movement by every molecule in the entire earth system. Therefore, the model cannot and should not be invalidated because it is not exactly correct. 
2. Climate models are an explanation of a natural phenomenon. Scientists are involved in a cyclical process of inquiry in which they make observations of an interesting atmospheric phenomenon, collect data, derive evidence, make claims, and then share their claims with the science community. Theories exist because they are the best explanation for the evidence we currently have, and they are continually tweaked and modified over time (and may even change completely) as new evidence is brought to light. Climate models undergo the exact same process: they are developed based on evidence, continually tested, refined, modified, and even replaced. This is not a bad thing, it is what science is designed to do. 
3. Climate models are predictive tools. If science’s only objective was to make observations and explain phenomenon, it would not be a very useful entity. We value science because it gives us the ability to predict likely outcomes based on what we know. Even though climate model projections are approximations (rather than detailed and exact) they are still extremely valuable and informative tools. The state of climate models is not a limitation to the field; it is a key component that makes it a worthwhile field of study. 

In the classroom, these 3 characteristics that describe climate models can also be used to describe the more common types of classroom models listed earlier. I believe we can incorporate science models into the classroom by simply making these characteristics explicit to the students, as well as by giving them the opportunity to create, evaluate, and revise science models in light of those characteristics. Something as simple as exposure to the concepts can really go a long way.

Our society is facing a major crisis. To both adapt to and mitigate global climate change will require changes in the way we operate as a society. We will need to make smart decisions on how we use energy, develop/modify infrastructure, and use land. These changes can only be accomplished if everyone in our society contributes. We make decisions every day that impact the climate and we need to be sure those decisions are informed regarding not only how we interact with the environment on a personal level, but also as a society via informed policy changes. Since every person in the United States is a consumer of products and has the ability vote, it is important the science community takes steps to inform the public in every way possible, beginning at the K-12 level.

Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Tom Morgan and Sherry Brown for their thoughtful comments and suggestions.

References

IPCC. (2007). Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (S. Solomon, D. Quin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. Averyt, et al., Eds.) Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.

National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Newport, F. (2010, March 11). Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop. Retrieved January 2012, from Gallup Politics: http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/americans-global-warming-concerns-continue-drop.aspx