NE2019 P1: Teaching Climate Change Beyond the Classroom

NEXT EARTH: TEACHING CLIMATE CHANGE ACROSS THE DISCIPLINES

A NEARLY CARBON-NEUTRAL CONFERENCE

Panel 1: Teaching Climate Change Beyond the Classroom

“Hot Potato, Hot Potato, Hot Potato Planet: Games and Non-Formal Education for Teaching Climate Justice”

Noa Cykman (M.A., Political Sociology, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil)

“Take it Outside: Eating for the Ecosystem”

Sherrilyn M. Billger, PhD and Andrew F. Smith (Associate Professor of Philosophy, Drexel University)

“The Philosopher and the Entrepreneur: The Pedagogical Significance of a Symbiotic Relationship”

Andrew F. Smith (Associate Professor of Philosophy, Drexel University) and Sherrilyn M. Billger, PhD

“Climate Change: Who should be teaching it? To whom should we be teaching it? How should we be teaching it?”

Ken Hiltner (Professor of English and Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara)

36 replies
  1. Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

    Hi All,

    Many thanks for visiting our panel. Although this is the sixth NCN conference that we have staged at UCSB, this is the first time that I have been part of an actual panel. I have been so busy coordinating things that I could never carve out the time. So, suffice it to say that I am more than a little excited about joining everyone else here.

    In the course of the past five years, teaching climate change has slowly emerged as my central preoccupation. I now teach two large lectures that will together have more than 1500 students in them in 2019-20. Both are lower-division, general introductions to a range of issues related to the climate crisis. As I note in my talk, teaching these courses is not an easy job. The problem is simple enough: there is an enormous amount to teach, covering many discrete fields, and nearly all of it is rapidly changing.

    Compare this to teaching something like a survey of English literature from Beowulf to Milton, which I have also done. As it covers over 800 years of literature, no other English course at UCSB is anywhere near as sweeping. Yet, it covers just one field, English culture and its literature (and not, for example, also French and Italian literature). Nonetheless, this was a difficult lecture to put together, as cramming 800 years of literature into a ten-week quarter was no easy task. But, having put it together over a decade ago, I now have it. True, each year I freshen it up in light of new scholarship, but, to be completely honest, it has been substantively the same lecture for years now.

    My lectures on climate change, in comparison, are nearly unrecognizable from five years ago. During those years, I had to follow scores of new fields, learning and relearning them as they also tried to keep up with the emerging climate crisis.

    So, who should be doing this teaching, and to whom, and how? It feels like we need a new field, a subset of environmental studies devoted exclusively to communicating climate change. Except it needs to be a superset of nearly everything that environmental studies surveys – and a whole lot more to boot. While, as I note in my talk, this job requires enormous research, little of it is acknowledged as the sort of original, field-specific research that is prized in the academy – in other words, what we reward at the time of academic merit reviews. This is esp the case if we pitch our classes to be understandable and appealing to a broad range of students (i.e. freshman through grad students) and even to the public online. To many, this sort of teaching seems like very low-level stuff indeed.

    Perhaps I am just bellyaching, but it feels like academia is simply now quite set up to handle what I believe should be one of our most central missions: giving every student that comes through the door (and anyone outside the door who is at all interested) an understanding of the climate crisis and what each of us can do about it.

    I am curious to hear what you think.

    Ken

    • Jeff Black, Humboldt State University says:

      Hi Ken. I agree that everyone needs to know about the climate crisis / resilience (CC/R) – for the good of all (e.g. climate justice), including the other critters and associated habitats. How can we incorporate this learning for all, by all teachers? I like mention of ‘what we reward at the time of academic merit reviews’ and perhaps taken further, review of tenure track progressions in the coming years. At Humboldt State, 24 faculty/staff/students from all colleges came together to hash out what it would look like to craft a climate crisis GE program for all students and came up with the following ILO: Students will be able to demonstrate basic knowledge of causes, impacts, and solutions to climate change and related systemic crises from both the Natural Sciences and Human Dimensions perspectives. At the time (May ’18) we thought it might take two GE courses from different colleges, where both courses ‘help students make connections between the realms of Scientific and Human Dimensions with regard to this global phenomenon, which impacts the earth and all its inhabitants.’ For example, while CC/R Natural Science courses may focus on science, these courses must also include connections to Human Dimensions themes when addressing causes, impacts and solutions. Similarly, while CC/R Human Dimensions courses may focus on socio-political / humanities aspects, these courses must also include connections to Natural Science themes when addressing causes, impacts and solutions. We have yet to ‘institutionalize’ the proposal, but some of us urgently revised our Spring ’19 courses accordingly.

      • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

        HI Jeff,

        Many thanks for this!

        I love Humboldt’s proposed goal: that “Students will be able to demonstrate basic knowledge of causes, impacts, and solutions to climate change and related systemic crises from both the Natural Sciences and Human Dimensions perspectives.” Kudos to you folks for working on this, as no such discussion for GE courses is underway at UCSB (sigh).

        I am intrigued by the idea of splitting it into two courses from different colleges. This would in some sense cut my job in half. The downside to the approach that I have undertaken is that it just gives one perspective. For example, take transportation. Someone coming at this from the natural sciences, might focus on technological solutions, such as electric or self driving cars. However, since I approach it from the perspective of the humanities, I am wary of these sorts of solutions because of things like externalized carbon costs (i.e 17-35 Metric tons of CO2 or equivalent gases are emitted during the production of any car, regardless of whether it is electric, gas, hybrid, etc.), social justice issues in the mining of lithium for batteries, the fact that the proliferation of automobiles around the world is now catching up with the US at a frightening rate, etc. Hence, I am far more likely to propose solutions that involve cultural changes, such as denser living conditions (i.e. cities) where automobiles may not be necessary at all.

        Of course, I think that this is the right approach (!), but the fact is that students would likely benefit from multiple perspectives. Having a single course taught by a half dozen or more instructors seems like too many, but, I am intrigued by the notion of two dovetailing courses with two instructors with inherently different perspectives.

        Ken

        • Jeff Black, Humboldt State University says:

          Morning Ken. Other folks in Humboldt’s ENVS host a 15 week course on climate change with different profs coming in each week from 10-15 disciplines (Native American Studies, Atmospheric Chemistry, Wildlife, Enviro Engineering, Psychology, Enviro Restoration, Outdoor Recreation, Oceanography, Sociology, Fisheries, Communications, Plant Ecology, Social Work x3, etc.). Those students get a broad flavor, but do not focus down on any one aspect addressing causes, impacts, to solutions as described in your valuable example focusing on transportation. The CC/R project idea not only insists on the cross-fostering aspect to ‘help students make connections between the realms of Scientific and Human Dimensions,’ but emphasizes ‘some type of activity or embedded action (application component) in response to Climate Change as part of the CCR curriculum.’ This last semester, it seemed my job was doubled rather than cut in half. But, as I say, we’re still working this out. We’re hoping for a culture of CC/R that spreads through the entire curriculum (multiple courses) so students will be prepared. Kind regards, J

          • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

            HI Jeff,

            What a fascinating mix of disciplines!

            It really is great to hear about the commitment that you folks have made, esp as you were able to enlist so many different faculty to the cause. I also really like the idea of encouraging some sort of action or activity. The notion that it would have a larger, long-term benefit across the curriculum in a range of fields is also terrific. Kudos again.

            It must have taken quite an initiative to get so much buy-in!

            Ken

  2. cslown says:

    @Noa-I appreciated the emphasis on the integration of education. I was particularly struck by the statement “a different way to conceive …knowledge requires contact, an integrated, and sincere listening.” Are you familiar with Dee Fink’s “Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach”? He argues for an emphasis on caring and integration as well. Thank you for your thought-provoking talk!

    • afsmith says:

      Very interesting talk, @Noa. I’m wondering which games have been most successful among university-level students. I work with many students who specialize in environmental science and environmental studies, so they’re well versed in the basics of climate change and related ecological crises. Are there games that could be used to expand their sense of connection with the ecosystems we inhabit, for example? This could perhaps make concrete some of what they have learned in other classes.

      • noacykman says:

        Hi, @afsmith. Thank you for your comment.
        Besides the “Farmille” game, the other dynamics I mentioned are suitable for all ages/educational levels. There can always be adaptations; for instance, the “hot potato” game can be played simply by throwing the ball from person to person, and each one who receives it unfolds a layer and reads the sentence/question (I have done this in university, and it works very well; it gets funny, and it happens that people start answering the questions without having been asked to).
        The last dynamics I mentioned can also be used for university students. Building a human pyramid, which could be, for similar reflections, making a “human chair circle”, or making a circle where everyone holds a rope, and one person walks on in – (it works!). These may require a willingness of students to take the risk, to get involved, to look fool… (I think we have a lot to learn from theatre and arts students in regards to this). It’s good to start with “lighter” presentation and group interaction games, then getting into the more “radical” ones.
        I haven’t approached ecology/nature as a main subject in the activities I made in the university. On the topic “language”, for instance, we asked everyone to bring food for a pic-nic, then divided two “monkey tribes”, which had to designate a leader each, and the two leaders had to negogiate the division of food between both tribes, without using words. The leader and the groups can talk (with words) beforehand to define goals/strategies, then the leaders go negotatie. If, after a while, negotiation isn’t successful, leaders go talk with their tribes again. Until an agreement. I think this one is suitable for reflecting on nature — to discuss communication, cooperation/competition, abundance/scarcity, tribal life…
        Other possibilities, are, for instance: ask each student to get something they find beautiful in nature, then ask what it ressembles in the human world. It can be a “show” where everyone has to present a “pitch” on their piece of nature. It will show how 99% of our inventions derive from nature forms and intelligence, as we notice that, clearly, it isn’t nature that is mimicking human inventions.
        There are others, many others, and there are plenty yet to invent… I’d be happy to continue to think and ellaborate together, if you wish 🙂

        • noacykman says:

          Hmm, I re-read your comment. Indeed, it’s a particular public, when they are all specialists. I think the matter would be to take knowledge beyond the rational understanding of the problem, to their feelings, to their daily habits. How do they experience the situation in their personal lives? How do they we apply our knowledge in their choices?
          What food and products do they consume, how do these products relate with the planet? (Most cosmetics are tested on animals. How do we use our knowledge in our choices?).
          How do they treat plants? (As objects? As beings?) How do plants treat them? (Plants are masters of unconditional love: they will nourish and heal equally the rich, the poor, the good, the bad…).
          And so on… These reflections can be part of a dynamic or incorporated to games.
          Or else, to deal with concepts through a game, there could be an auction in which separate groups have to buy (with fake money, or bean seeds) the philosophical concepts they consider to have higher value for their lives, then discuss why.
          Etc, etc…

    • noacykman says:

      Hey!
      Thank you for your listening, integration, and comment =)
      I hadn’t heard of that book, or author – will check!

      (Are you participating in the conference? I couldn’t decipher your profile name..)

  3. cslown says:

    @Andrew and @Sherrilyn I was struck by how your pedagogy with observing plants resembled meditation and a body scan, specifically Jon Kabat-Zinn’s Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction and the way the brain interacts with environment and personal experiences including perception of plants and well-being. Thank you for your reflection on pedagogy and taking your class outside!

    • afsmith says:

      Thanks so much for your comment, @cslown. I’ll be sure to look at Kabat-Zinn’s book over the summer. I expect it could prove quite useful. I don’t explicitly do mindfulness work with students, but I’ve considered doing so. I’m always in search of methods and practices that can facilitate not just better learning but better mental health, particularly since my students are perpetually harried and overtaxed.

    • Sherrilyn Billger, Eating for the Ecosystem says:

      Yes, @cslown! I had MBSR in mind while speaking. I’ve taught yoga and dance, and encouraged mindfulness in those activities as well. The focused attention is key. I am glad that mindfulness has been moving beyond meditation to ‘allow’ other behaviors. For instance, some people with a trauma history (like me) struggle with traditional sitting meditation or holding one yoga asana for a long time because the silence can spur triggering memories and fixation. I personally get mindfulness benefits from activities with more movement, whether physical or mental or both. Observing ‘nature’ and the self in relation to nature is not static because ‘nature’ is not static. @clslown, do you practice mindfulness outside?

  4. cslown says:

    @Ken Thank you for your talk. I am wondering if as a hyperobject, climate change and its scale confounds our perception? Maybe we need many lenses and many voices because of the constant exponential way the environment is changing. Which makes me think the your questions and reflections are both prescient and timely.

    • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

      I think that you hit the problem squarely on the head, as we do indeed need “many lenses and many voices.” The problem is teaching them all, esp as they are constantly changing.

  5. chislenko says:

    Thank you all very much for your talks! In all the talks on this panel, I appreciated hearing both your general thoughts and your own experiences trying pedagogical and other strategies. There are a lot of good ideas here, and I hope to use some of them in my teaching.

    I have a general question for everyone on the panel. Part of what seems to me transformative in teaching climate change is the need to think less about conveying information, and more about inspiring people to care, and challenging them to think through their own role in climate change in a personal, practical way. This is part of what used to be called moral education. I’m especially interested in addressing climate change denial– not just denial that climate change is real or significant or human-caused, but the failure of most of us to integrate climate change into our lives in ways that match the scale of the crisis. Are there particular games, outdoor experiences, course modules, etc. that you’ve found to be especially effective in getting students to make lasting changes to their lifestyles, and become more active in advocating for larger changes?

    A couple of more specific variants of this question come to mind in watching Ken’s talk. Ken, thank you so much for your talk, and for all your work in organizing this conference. Most of your answers to your three main questions seem absolutely right to me. We need a broad range of people teaching and learning about climate change, as you nicely bring out.
    I have two related questions about how you’re thinking about some key details of what you said. First, I wonder if you have thoughts or experience teaching climate change in courses that are not mainly about climate change. You’re teaching whole courses on it, which is fantastic, and more than I’ve done. But it seems to me that a lot more than that is needed. Without a college-wide requirement, those courses often preach to the choir; and even with that requirement, I suspect we can be doing more to have as many different courses as possible integrate the connections between their topic(s) and climate change into the syllabus and class meetings, so that students get a broad and repeated message that climate change is deeply affecting many of the things they’re learning about. Shorter units or readings on climate change in many different courses are also less time-consuming and doable for a broader range of teachers. Have you tried doing smaller fractions of courses like that — maybe even in a literature course? — or heard about interesting ways of doing that? Lowell Wyse’s talk in Panel 6 was also really interesting to me in this connection, and I wonder if you’ve tried similar things in non-environmental courses.
    Second, and relatedly, I wonder how important a broad and comprehensive knowledge of the various economic, scientific, moral, etc. issues around climate change is for teaching it effectively. It seems crucial mainly for giving a comprehensive picture. But is that the goal? If a key goal is addressing denial, we can do that with little more than asking students questions. If the goal is to show a connection between climate change and recent literature, or racism, or drilling, it’s enough to know one or a cluster of aspects of the issue fairly well. There are some bigger questions about the goals of pedagogy here that I’d love to hear your thoughts about. I tend to think that our biggest goal as teaching is getting students to see, in a practical and personal way, their own connection to climate change and their own potential for helping to address it.
    Thanks again!

    – Eugene Chislenko

    • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

      HI Eugene,

      These are great points!

      Regarding moral education, because I am a humanities professor, I approach climate change as a human problem brought about by human actions. Consequently, I repeatedly stress to students that technology alone will not solve this problem. Instead, we need to look hard at rewriting a range of cultural practices. Even though the challenges that we face are daunting—and let’s face it, more than a little scary and depressing—approaching this as a human issue can and should be empowering. There is no need to wait for Elon Musk or anyone else to solve this problem (especially as it is clear that these technologists simply cannot come anywhere near doing it on their own), as each of us can act today through voting, activism, and our personal choices regarding food, transportation, housing, clothing, and so forth. In order to stress this point, I often start my lectures with a quote often (incorrectly) attributed to Gandhi: “Be the change that you want to see in the world.”

      As to “teaching climate change in courses that are not mainly about climate change,” a few years ago the UC enacted a program intent on furthering teaching about climate change. I was lucky enough to co-direct the UCSB part of the program. Instead of asking for courses focusing on CC, we helped support any that touched on the issue. For example, an introductory course on statistics – which seemingly would have nothing to do with CC – that nonetheless used CC examples for its problem sets. Seeing firsthand just how creative faculty were in this regard was very inspiring indeed.

      Regarding teaching CC in a literature course, this is in some sense how I got my start, as I began my teaching career explicating the environmental implications of various texts that I taught. Before long, I began including in my courses only texts that had some sort of environmental connection. So, a course that, for example, started out as a survey of Renaissance literature slowly morphed into an exploration of the early-modern emergence of contemporary environmental thinking.

      As to your final point, yes, I agree that focusing on issues like CC denial is important. In fact, I have two courses that I regularly teach on the subject. One has the very unoriginal title of “The Rhetoric of Climate Change Denial.” The problem is that students leave this class without necessarily knowing what exactly is causing CC and what they can do about it. This is why I am starting a new lecture on “Climate Change: what it is and what each of us can do about it” (another unoriginal title!). Because there is no sort of required course on CC at UCSB, I see this as my one and perhaps only shot at teaching them the basics of what they need to know. To put it another way, even though my Rhetoric of CC students hopefully learn a good bit about denial literature, they are completely unprepared to assess whether a $10 carbon tax is a good idea or not – or a range of other issues. So, I hope to address as much and as many issues as they can reasonably be expected to learn in 10 weeks.

      Ken

  6. Sophie says:

    Hi All,
    Thank you for your talks! I like what Eugene has to say about the need to communicate climate change as part of “moral education.” I would also like to add that I think climate change discourses need to be integrated into the K-12 civics’ curriculum. My research focuses on sustainability and citizenship, and since US citizenship requires both rights and responsibilities, I think it is imperative to teach rising voters about their responsibilities as citizens to curb global warming. But Eugene has an interesting point: there is a big difference between knowledge and practice. The upcoming Global Climate Strike that will occur (https://globalclimatestrike.net/) is a good start and it will be interesting to see how citizens in various countries around the world participate.

  7. afsmith says:

    Eugene’s point about all of us being part of a wider culture of climate denial is a very good one. The path of least–or perhaps only–resistance in our culture is to be denialists of the sort Eugene describes. I’ve found the work of Daniel Quinn (particularly Ishmael and The Story of B) to be quite helpful in discussing this issue with students. Quinn’s work also helps to show how being trapped in a denialist culture also operates as a form of captivity that prevents us from living not just more sustainably but also more autonomously and healthily. We’re not just in denial about climate change, fr example, but also about rampant depression, anxiety, rage, addiction, etc. This is no coincidence.

    Also, it’s worth noting that I’ve had much more success–in terms of facilitating a moral education–discussing with students what people around the world are doing that’s working to build better, more sustainably lives and livelihoods than in dwelling on imminent catastrophe. This isn’t to say that I myself don’t think that we are on the brink of climatological and ecological disaster. We are … or, more rightly, are already past the brink. But particularly with env sciences and env studies students, who already know the ins and outs of climate change, I see an earnest desire to fight this culture’s denialism. It’s just that they often aren’t given any tools in their classes (or elsewhere) that help them to figure out what points of intervention are open to them.

    I’m happy to elaborate with specifics (beyond Quinn) if anyone is interested.

    • Rebecca Young, University of Birmingham says:

      I love this point about Quinn’s Ishmael because it’s one of the first texts I used when I began teaching high school students about climate change. As you note, I loved it for the positive effect it could have on what is otherwise a rather demoralizing topic for instruction. Instead, we focused on awareness and in particular, this quote: “. . . what you do is teach a hundred what I’ve taught you, and inspire each of them to teach a hundred.” What we learned in our class talks was the value of spreading the word–even if this is as simple as the importance of buying fresh eggs from the farmer next door versus the supermarket. One concrete action leads to another and another. Thanks for the comment!

  8. noacykman says:

    @afsmith and @Sherrilyn, I would love to join one of your outdoor walks 🙂
    It’s very interesting to think of the intertwining (or coincidence?) of personal, social and ecological welbeing.
    When people mentioned health, quality of life, satisfaction, steadiness as factors of their welbeing, I was wondering: aren’t the same factor applicable to plants welbeing?
    Something I would like to hear more about is how you justify the use of alternatives to pedagogical conventions (to assessments, grades and so on), both theoretically (to deepen my thoughts on it) and institutionally — how does the university accept it (or not)?
    Thanks for sharing!

    • afsmith says:

      Hi Noa. Thanks so much for your comment. Yes, part of what Sherrilyn and I are saying is that plant wellbeing and human wellbeing are not merely aligned but co-implicating. We depend on plant wellbeing, and their wellbeing is greatly improved by engaging in practices and developing policies that enhance our personal, social, and ecological wellbeing. It’s our hope that awareness of this can help students not just to care more about our living communities but also about their own overall health.

      I wish I could say that administrators at my university are sympathetic to my pedagogical approach in a course like this. I’ve been doing walks with students for many years–well before I was tenured–and eventually was able to sell administrators on their value. I’ve done so in part, though, by overstating the “field work” we do. Most of the time, I’m just getting students outside without any further assignment. Evidence indicates that this greatly benefits their mental health. I don’t particularly care whether it has any value in terms of their wider learning. In my experience, though, they’re better able to function on days when we’re in the classroom.

      As for working without assignments and grades, I must admit that I largely keep this quiet. I see absolutely no reduction in learning, but these practices go against prevailing wisdom. If pressed, I’m up front about how I approach my courses. But, with tenure, I’m in a position in which administrators can’t force me to change my ways. I regard reducing assignments and grading as a necessary means to focus on learning itself, particularly because my students are overworked.

  9. noacykman says:

    @Ken, thank you very much for sharing your thoughts, and for organizing this conference.
    Your work in teaching climate justice seems solid and crucial.

    I feel the answers you bring to your questions go in a wise direction. Maybe that is, in part, because you think, but also feel them?
    I identify Eugene’s words on the need to “think less about conveying information, and more about inspiring people to care, and challenging them to think through their own role in climate change in a personal, practical way”.
    I believe it applies to the ones who are teaching it as well (and those who will/should be teaching it). They/we are the ones who care, who are challenging them/ourselves to find our role in personal and practical ways, aren’t we?

    In this point, we have a common ground between different disciplines and with the extra-academic community. We may have different intellectual backgrounds, but we share feelings — caring, inspiration, fear, resignation, indignation, empathy, confusion,… Maybe they are a good starting point for conversation, as academia’s doors and disciplinary boundaries are blown off, and as we build knowledge and feelings for the transition.
    This is beyond pedagogy, it is also about living the change (that which we want to see in the world). Shifting from the modern paradigm/solutions (more technology, more science, more reason) to new ways to feel, to perceive, to function as humans on Earth, new (or older) ways to relate…
    So, on the three questions, maybe I am suggesting that: the ones who care and can teach should teach it to those who care and want to learn, through learning important contents, but also through developing a new sensitivity, a deeper humanity…

    • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

      HI Noa,

      Great points – and great that you can be joining us from Brazil!

      Let me also echo Eugene’s words about challenging students (and anyone else paying attention) to “think through their own role in climate change in a personal, practical way.” As a literature teacher, I long ago concluded that part of my job is to get students to think about life. Sure, I could just teach the poetry itself, but without going that extra step and encouraging students to have a personal encounter with it, I feel that I’ve only done part of the job.

      However, when it comes to the climate crisis, I feel that I need to do something further. Because the sort of responses that I am advocating to the crisis often have to do with personal and cultural choices, it feels disingenuous if I do not personally enact them. So, for example, I was vegan for five years, until recently when I relented and decided to occasionally eat a few animal products. Although my going vegan was largely for environmental reasons (though issues like animal rights and social justice obviously entered into my decision), I also wanted to let students know (to borrow a phrase used by Bill McKibben at one of our previous NCN conferences) that I “walk the talk” when it comes to the climate crisis. After all, if I did not care enough to actually do something – rather than just stand in the front of the room endlessly talking – why should they in turn do something? Because my example matters, I think about how my personal decisions might be enacted by others. Consequently, the reason that I lightened up on eating some animal products is that such a position hopefully opens up a road that anyone can immediately embark upon. In other words, attempting to go vegan cold turkey (so to speak) is exceptionally difficult and likely to quickly fail. However, anyone can ease into “eating for the planet” (as I like to call it) by making relatively small but environmentally significant changes like cutting out beef and lamb for a start.

      This strikes me as, to use your words, a “common ground between different disciplines and with the extra-academic community.” In other words, the first order of business for us all (really anyone on the planet) is to work out ways of living sustainably. As a teacher, I am grateful to have a profession that affords me the luxury of time to research ways of doing so. As a citizen of the planet, my job is to enact them as best I can. These not only include lifestyle changes like eating a largely plant-based diet and giving up flying, but also things like voting and activism. The wonderful thing about being a teacher is that it also allows me to share what I have discovered – both during my research and when working on personally enacting it – with others. Since my students are at a pivotal period in their lives when they are, in a great number of ways, trying to work out just what sort of lives they want to live as they enter adulthood, many of them seem sincerely interested to hear about what I have learned along the way.

      Such teaching is a far cry from teaching Renaissance poetry. Consequently, many of my colleagues seem to feel that I have lost a grip on things. I, on the other hand, feel that I am finally embracing what really matters.

      Ken

      • noacykman says:

        @Ken, that’s a powerful comment.
        To walk the talk is essential, challenging and admirable.
        You are right, it’s nonsense to expect they will do what we don’t… Example is education’s first instance.

        I see it as building new subjectivities, not formatted by the current institutions, schemes of power and habits. Once we don’t see ourselves as “individuals”, “winners/losers/competitors”, “rulers/slaves”, but as integrated organisms, the natural and logic consequence is to consider all the beings, that are but our continuation, in the choices we make. Caring for our own body and for the Earth are not two separate things. Organic or poisoned food, fluored tooth paste or dental powder, heavy metal deodorant or magnesia milk, disposable or reusable, these are choices both for ourselves and for the planet. We pollute both, or care for both. Same organism, no fronteer between the territories…

        As we plant our own gardens, we abandon the system. The Invisible Committee said that “to destitute the government is to become ungovernable”.

        My respect for your work. I bet it is contagious.

  10. Rebecca Young, University of Birmingham says:

    Ken,
    Thanks so much for this candid talk about the importance of teaching about climate change. Your point about anyone who is willing should (but with caution!) is well-taken, but I hope we all become willing. Your YouTube endeavor sounds very intriguing, and I appreciated your comment on its intent to make the lectures available to all. This, I think, is key. Of course higher education should rise to the challenge that our current situation demands but the obligation falls on all of us in education–K-12 included. An informed citizenry at every level and every profession is essential to affecting any long term impactful change and the only way to reach this level of awareness and actionable knowledge is for climate change to be part of (if not the center!) compulsory education. I realize that the ‘how’ of accomplishing this may allude and frustrate us, but as David Orr contends, our most pressing concern should be reflected in the way we teach young people. My talk focuses on how we can do this through literature; since this is how you started, I’d love your thoughts on how I can better support educators and schools interested in taking on this challenge. Most of us do not have a background in climate science and may lack the confidence to address issues we don’t fully understand ourselves so the research you reflect on are part of the obstacles we face; the intent of the resource I’m compiling is to help alleviate some of that and to provide a starting point for educators at all levels and disciplines. Thanks so much for bringing this issue to our conversations.

    -Rebecca

    • Ken Hiltner (UC Santa Barbara) says:

      HI Rebecca,

      Many thanks for your comments above – as well as for your talk!

      Yes, I am in complete agreement that “[a}n informed citizenry at every level and every profession is essential.” This is one of the reasons that I am increasingly pitching my classes to students just beginning their university experience, as this allows me to speak to a range of interests and disciplines. A couple of years ago I polled them and found out that the students in the room had either declared or were interested in declaring 35 different majors. Beginning even earlier with K-12 students strikes me as better still, as a national poll from a few years ago found that a third of high school teachers were teaching climate change skepticism.

      The big question, which you raise in your talk, is “how do we accomplish this in a time frame befitting with the crisis”? As you suggest, literature is an excellent place to start. I found your approach to Frankenstein very interesting indeed. I entered academia with an ecocritical analysis of Milton, specifically Milton’s Eve and the relationship that she had to the place she found herself, the garden. In terms of teaching, having taught Paradise Lost quite a few times now, my central aim has been to get students thinking about their relationship to the places that they inhabit and how they might feel if they brought about some fundamental change to their place on earth. Or worse, did something that brought about its destruction. Eve’s incredibly moving speech in Book 11 when she learns of her exile from the garden – as a consequence of her actions – is one that students really seem to connect up with, as it raises the very timely question of how we would feel if we learned that we had destroyed the place that nurtured us. Since I now teach a broad range of literature, beginning with the Epic of Gilgamesh, it has become clear to me that all sorts of literature is filled with moments like this that present excellent teaching opportunities, as students can connect up with them emotionally.

      This also makes clear that we can approach climate change in a meaningful way in a variety of different classrooms, including (and I would add especially!) those where literature in the humanities are taught.

      Ken

      • Rebecca Young, University of Birmingham says:

        Thanks, Ken, for this great example about Eve lamenting the consequences of her actions. In Confronting Climate Crises I write about the importance of knowing and caring for the places we call home, connecting this concept to a willingness to help others protect theirs (in this time of climate migration). At the middle or high school levels or even through adapted versions at the elementary level, I used The Hobbit as an example of literature that promotes this sense of stewardship. Of course there are many texts that do this, but I find the concept itself as so important in a world of easy and frequent movements around the globe where the idea of “home” is often not so clear.

  11. dfernandez@csumb.edu says:

    Hello Noa,

    I really appreciate your talk and resonate with your views about much of contemporary education. I also agree that games can be a very unique way to approach learning from a completely different direction and dimension. I also wanted more detail on the games. For instance, I couldn’t follow all the details of the hot potato game and I wondered if you have some sort of a reference or written summary of some of the various games you have applied. Also, small point, does the one involving the wealth gathering farmers really need a styrofoam plate, or could it be a non-single-use plate?

    • noacykman says:

      Hi, @dfernandez,
      Thank you for your comment.
      I don’t have an organized record of the games I have applied, unfortunately. There are some websites that contain archives of games (such as http://www.kefkefkef.com), which offer many ideas and inspiration.
      The hot potato game is played with a ball made of several layers of wrapped newspaper. You wrap a newspaper page into a smal ball (and attach it with tape, so it gets “solid”); then, you put a small paper with the sentence/question (and a seed, as I suggested for the climate subject), and another newspaper page on top of it, wrapped around the first layer. A small piece of tape will hold it together, and so the layers continue to wrap up, until all the sentences are inside and the layers of newspaper have turned into a ball.
      Then, the ball can be simply thrown among the group, or passed in the form of the “hot potato” game (I’m wondering: is it a more traditional children game in Brazil then elsewhere? I saw on youtube that it exists in English too, but maybe you don’t know it…). In any case, the point is that the ball will be slowly undone by different people, each unwrapping a layer and reading outloud the sentence/question (which can be answered/commented at the moment and/or left for posterior debate).
      Is it more understandable now?
      About the styrofoam plate, you are right, it is not coherent–it didn’t occur to me back then. It’s fun to stick the seed in, but any non-single-use alternative would be a better option.

  12. dfernandez@csumb.edu says:

    Dear Andrew and Sherrilyn,

    I appreciated how you worked with the class (I assume it was the same class?). In any case, since I assume you also have to give grades, which I have mixed feeling about in general, how do you assess/provide grades to your students?

    • afsmith says:

      Hey there. In this class, I provided no assessment. All students received a grade of A no matter how much or how little they did. I don’t do this in most other classes, mind you. But I’m experimenting with the idea of flipping the script: expecting nothing of my students but a willingness to attend class, do in-class readings, engage in discussion, go on walks if they’re compelled to do so. The responsibility is mine to draw them in rather than theirs to show me … anything.

      • Jeff Black, Humboldt State University says:

        @afsmith – This is refreshing, especially when students are taking 4-5 classes and working on the side. Some universities employ ‘no grades’ or ‘narrative evaluations’.
        https://www.bestcollegereviews.org/colleges-without-letter-grades/.
        When I explore with ‘no exams’ alternatives, e.g. reflective journaling, students remark they ‘learn and retain so much more’ and ‘invest more hours than when cramming for tests’.
        Andrew, have you tried to assess how many hours students invest outside of class? I wonder how this equates to for a typical 3 unit course (Carnegie Units), which is ‘supposed’ to refer to 6 hours of study time for 3 unit class that has 3 hours of face time in the classroom? Are some students investing many more hours than normal?

        • afsmith says:

          Hi Jeff:

          Thanks so much for your comment. My motivation to explore a no-grade system is inspired by both the amount of coursework my students typically have (5-6 courses per term, with labs on top of that for students in the sciences) and the fast paced character of the 10-week quarter system we use at Drexel. Essentially, this means that I have at most about 4 good weeks any given term before the students are utterly swamped, sick, or both.

          Under these conditions, less definitely is more. Generally speaking, it’s pretty rare for students not to continue showing up for class, even though they technically don’t have to do so. Yes, I lose a few students, but I likely would have anyway (mentally if not necessarily physically, and I’m not in the business of “forcing” students to learn–as if this ever really works. And numerous students do self-report that they end up learning more in part because they don’t have to cram as much material as they can into their brains.

          I haven’t tried to assess non-class hours worked, though. It’s a great idea to do so. I’ll make a point of trying to generate this data in coming terms. If nothing else, it could help to diffuse some of the blowback I receive from my chair. And if it doesn’t, that’s fine too. I can handle a little blowback.

  13. dfernandez@csumb.edu says:

    Thank you, Andrew. I can appreciate that and I resonate with that thinking, at least to some extent and in some of my classes. Again, its often a struggle for me. So often in education (certainly in mine) it is the students who are supposed to appease what the instructor’s expectation are, even when the instructors are misguided. Its refreshing to see other models out there.

    On that same note, however, if a student only came to class a few times, would they still get the A? And, do they all know this going in? That is, do you have to state any expectation up front? In other words, is the grade something they ask about?

Comments are closed.