1. A critical, collaborative and constructivist pedagogy for the social science of climate change Peter Hughes University of Bradford p.hughes3@bradford.ac.uk April 29, 2010 C-Change in GEES Manchester

2. Structure CC & pedagogy A critical, collaborative, constructivist pedagogy CC pedagogy in action Global Environmental Management 1993-2010

3. A Pedagogy of/for Climate Change Characteristics of climate change that present challenges/opportunities for pedagogy Uncertainty/indeterminacy Inter/trans-disciplinarity Knowledge constantly being reconstituted Secularisation of knowledge through mass media and popular culture A super-complex issue (Barnett & Hallam, 1999)

4. A Critical/Constructive/Collaborative Pedagogy (Garrison & Archer, 2000) …Knowledge is actively constructed by individuals or social communities. Tynjala, 1999: 364 Collaboration is essential for social validation of personal meaning making Critical thinking and metacognitive awareness enable learners to become more self- directed/autonomous

5. Pedagogy of Climate Change in Action Global Environmental Management – Final year 20 credit module – 1993-2002 (University of Sunderland) – 2005-2010 (University of Bradford) – An interdisciplinary social science module available to various combinations of Geog., Env. Studies, Env. Sci., Env. Man. Tourism students

6. GEM knowledge domain Concepts: sustainable development; ecological modernisation; risk society; equity; governance; commons; regimes Themes: issue evolution; actor groups; local- global connections; values Issues: climate change, ozone, biodiversity, forests, oceans, Antarctica, nuclear technologies

8. GEM - A Critical Pedagogy? Comparative perspective Social construction of issues Developing confidence in critical engagement with sources (academic journals; media)

9. A Collaborative Pedagogy social learning space In-class discussion Collaborative group blog Learners encouraged to share and draw upon each others learning resources Student-led teaching sessions Group role-play

11. A Constructivist Pedagogy Pre-existing conceptions exposed at start of each class Issues presented as live, and real-time engagement encouraged Learners encouraged to construct narrative for module in terms of their own learning journey – Individual learning journals – Culminate in assessed e-portfolio – E-portfolio as fusion of subject and self

12. Specific learning activities Developing critical engagement with academic journals (see Hughes & Boyle, 2005: 26-27) Student-led teaching sessions (Hughes: GDN/GEES Good Practice Abstract 219) Use of the internet to engage with ongoing negotiations in international environmental affairs (Hughes: GDN/GEES Good Practice Abstract 177)

13. Review This is A pedagogy of climate change, not THE pedagogy of climate change It has developed as an ongoing conversation between subject matter, educational theory & practice, departmental and institutional contexts, the changing nature of learners, the experiences of the learners…

14. References Barnett, R. (2000) Supercomplexity and the curriculum, Studies in Higher Education, 25, 3, 2000. Barnett, R. and Hallam, S. (1999) Teaching for supercomplexity: a pedagogy for higher education, in Mortimere, P. (ed) Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning, London: Sage, 137-154 Garrison, DR and Archer, W (2000) A Transactional Perspective on Teaching and Learning, Oxford, Pergamon. Hughes, P. and Boyle, A (2005) Assessment in the Earth Sciences, Environmental Sciences and Environmental Studies, Plymouth: Higher Education Academy GEES Subject Centre Social Learning Group (2001a) Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks: Comparative History of Social Responses to Climate Change, Ozone Depletion and Acid Rain, Vol.1, MIT Press Social Learning Group (2001b) Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks: Functional Analysis of Social Responses to Climate Change, Ozone Depletion and Acid Rain, Vol.2, MIT Press Tynjala, P. (1999) Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment in the university, International Journal of Educational Research, 31: 357-442