Do Earth anD EnvironmEntal SciEncE tExtbookS PromotE miDDlE

DO EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL

SCIENCE TEXTBOOKS PROMOTE

MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’

CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ABOUT

CLIMATE CHANGE?

Textbooks’ consideration of students’ misconceptions

b y So y o u n g Ch o i , De v ni y o g i , Da n i e l P. Sh e P a r D S o n , a n D um a r P o r n Ch a r u S o m b a t

AFFILIATIONS: Ch o i —Department of Curriculum and

Instruction, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana;

ni y o g i —Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences,

and Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West

Lafayette, Indiana; Sh e P a r D S o n —Department of Curriculum

and Instruction, and Department of Earth and Atmospheric

Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana;

Ch a r u S o m b a t —Department of Earth and Atmospheric

Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Dev Niyogi, 915 W. State

St., Dept. of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences & Agronomy,

Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906-2054

E-mail: dniyogi@purdue.edu

The abstract for this article can be found in this issue, following

the table of contents.

DOI:10.1175/2009BAMS2625.1

In final form 20 November 2009

ne of the primary goals of climate change education is to

assist students in developing a scientific understanding

about the Earth’s climate system (NOAA 2009). Despite

an increase in supplemental educational materials and hands-

on activities in science classrooms, science textbooks are still

used as the general source of scientific concepts by teachers and

students (Fulp 2002; Weiss et al. 2002). Students develop their

understanding of scientific concepts based on their existing

ideas, just as scientists rely on their existing knowledge base

to acquire a better understanding about natural phenomena

(Bell 2005; Duit 1991). Misconceptions, or a lack of relevant

prior concepts, can hinder students from developing an

understanding of scientific concepts (Duit 1991; Rickinson

2001). It is critical, therefore, that science textbook authors

and publishers are aware of students’ common misconceptions

about climate change when developing textbooks so that their

works become effective tools for facilitating students’ concep-

tual development.

Many climate change education researchers have studied

students’ and teachers’ conceptual understanding of climate

change and the effectiveness of various teaching strategies

for the teaching and learning of climate change concepts.

However, few studies have focused on the representations of

climate change concepts found in science textbooks. The study

reported in this article sought to remedy this gap by 

The reviewed earth and environmental science textbooks

did not adequately address students’ misconceptions

about climate change, suggesting a need for revision.

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

conducting an analysis of the representations of

climate change concepts found in science textbooks

and examining these presentations for possible

contributions to students’ misconceptions about

climate change. The research questions were as

follows:

Ta b l e 1. Middle and high school students’ misconceptions of climate change. Superscript numbers

indicate the following: 1: Andersson and Wallin (2000); 2: Boyes and Stanisstreet (1993); 3: Boyes and

Stanisstreet (1994); 4: Boyes and Stanisstreet (1997a); 5: Boyes and Stanisstreet (1997b); 6: Boyes and

Stanisstreet (1998); 7: Boyes and Stanisstreet (2001); 8: Boyes et al. (1993); 9: Boyes et al. (1999);

10: Fisher (1998); 11: Gowda et al. (1997); 12: Koulaidis and Christidou (1999); 13: Myers et al. (2004);

14: Österlind (2005); 15: Pruneau et al. (2001); 16: Pruneau et al. (2003); 17: Rye et al. (1997).

Categories Students’ misconceptions

Basic notions

Confusion about the kind and

source of radiation involved in

the greenhouse effect

• Sun rays in general

• Heat or thermal rays emitted from the sun

• UV radiation reflecting off the Earth’s surface

• Increase in incoming UV or total solar radiation by the ozone layer

depletion

4, 12

Confusion between UV and

infrared radiation and surface

temperature

• UV rays are “hot”

4, 12

• No distinction between UV and infrared radiation and between heat and

surface temperature

4, 6, 10, 12, 14

Confusion about the kinds of

greenhouse gases

• Considering air pollutants as greenhouse gases

4, 12

• Not considering ground-level ozone or natural emissions as a greenhouse

gases

2, 7, 8

• Not considering CO

as a greenhouse gas

2, 4, 8, 15

• Not considering water vapor as a greenhouse gas

Involving concepts of a gas or

dust layer that traps heat inside

• Greenhouse gases form a thin layer around the Earth and trap heat

inside

1, 12, 16

• The greenhouse effect occurs where solar rays are trapped by the ozone

layer

4, 12, 16

• Heat is trapped under a layer of dust created by pollution

• The atmospheric gases make a barrier bouncing back heat from the Earth

Confusion about the definition

of greenhouse effect

• Do not know the definition

1, 15

• Confusion between the greenhouse effect and climate change

• Considering the greenhouse effect an environmental problem

12, 13

Confusion between weather

and climate

• Able to sense warmer temperature as an indication of climate change

11, 16

Causes

General environmentally

harmful actions are not closely

related to climate change

• Littering leads to climate change

2, 11

• Using environmentally unfavorable products/toxin cause climate change

2, 11

h Pollution

Climate change is caused by

• Acid rain

2, 7, 8, 15

• Nuclear waste

2, 7, 8

• Heat from car exhaust

• Air pollution or pollutants in general

1, 4, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16

i Ozone hole

• Ozone holes let more solar energy to get into the Earth, causing global

warming

1, 3, 4, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17

• Ozone holes let cooler air escape out of the Earth, increasing the global

average temperature

• The ozone layer depletion (without further details)

2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15

j Change in solar irradiation

• Increase in solar energy coming into the Earth

2, 7, 8, 16

• The Earth is getting closer to the sun

• Solar rays hit more areas of the Earth

890

july 2010

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

a) According to the education research literature, what

common misconceptions about climate change are

held by middle and high school students?

b) How do these commonly held misconceptions

about climate change compare to accepted sci-

entific concepts?

c) How do middle and high school science textbooks

present accepted scientific concepts related to

climate change?

d) What are the relationships between common

misconceptions about climate change found in

the research literature and science textbooks’

presentation of climate change concepts?

This study defines students’ concepts as their

mental representations of real world processes (e.g.,

the greenhouse effect) and components (e.g., carbon

dioxide). We use the term “misconceptions” to

refer to aspects of students’ conceptions that do not

reflect scientists’ understandings about a natural

phenomenon (Duit 1991). We identified students’

misconceptions about climate change and a range

of related topics, including the greenhouse effect,

global warming, and consequent changes in local

and regional climate.

METHODS. We conducted a literature review to

identify students’ common misconceptions of climate

change, from which scientific concepts corresponding

to the students’ common misconceptions were also

identified. Both the students’ common misconcep-

tions and corresponding scientific concepts were used

as a framework to review Earth and environmental

science textbooks regarding their potential contribu-

tion to students’ common misconceptions.

Students’ misconceptions about climate change. We

identified research articles pertaining to middle and

high school students’ concepts of climate change by

searching educational research databases, including

the Educational Research Information Center (ERIC),

Education Full Text, OmniFile Full Text Mega,

Proquest Research Library, and Google Scholar.

From these articles, studies that sampled students

from grades 7 to 12 (ages 12–18) were selected. This

process identified a total of 17 journal articles that

were reviewed to determine students’ common mis-

conceptions of climate change. We identified a total of

41 misconceptions related to climate change that were

discussed in the research literature (Table 1).

The articles selected were published between 1993

and 2005, but we found no pattern of variation in

students’ misconceptions corresponding to the year

of publication. Only two studies were undertaken

in the United States; other study locations included

Australia, Canada, Greece, Sweden, and the United

Kingdom. We did not find any variation in students’

misconceptions by study location; therefore, we

Ta b l e 1. Continued.

Categories Students’ misconceptions

Effects

k No change in my lifetime • Nothing would happen in my lifetime

15, 16

Climate change claims are

exaggerated

• Overestimates of the degree of global temperature change (e.g., about 7°F

increase to date and 18.4°F in 50 years)

1, 11

m Causes skin cancer • Global warming causes skin cancer

2, 6, 7, 8, 16

Not understanding different

feedbacks of climate change

• The expected climate change is only limited to warming in general

6, 11, 15

o Depletion of ozone layer

• The greenhouse gases cause ozone layer to deplete

3, 9, 17

• The greenhouse effect causes air pollutants to go up to higher altitudes

and attack the ozone layer

p Increased air pollution

• Greenhouse gases are air pollutants and increased greenhouse gas

concentration leads to air pollution

Resolution/ mitigation

Proposing pro-environmental

actions in general

• Proposing pro-environmental actions not closely related to climate change

as a solution (e.g., protection of rare species, reduction of the global

nuclear arsenal, the use of unleaded gas, pollute less, put waste in the

trashcan, clean the streets)

2, 7, 8, 16

Unaware of the difficulties

controlling CO

emissions

• Unaware of people’s dependency on fossil fuel and the complexity of CO

control

Negative attitude toward taking

action regarding climate change

• There is nothing that people can do about climate change

• People would not be willing to change their lifestyles

15, 16

891

july 2010AMERICAN METEOROlOGICAl SOCIETy

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

considered the identi-

fied misconceptions to

be representative. Eight

out of the 17 studies

were conducted in the

United Kingdom by

Boyes and Stanisstreet

(1993, 1994, 1997a,

1997b, 1998, 2001),

Boyes, Chuckran, and

Stanisstreet (1993),

and Myers, Boyes and

Stanisstreet (2004). The

U.K. students’ miscon-

ceptions were fairly consistent with the misconcep-

tions held by students of other countries.

We analyzed and interpreted Table 1 to develop a

more structured framework to review science text-

books: we analyzed what scientific understandings

students tended to lack or misunderstand and what

concepts should be more explicitly taught to correct

the students’ common misconceptions. The specific

linkages between the students’ misconceptions and

scientific concepts are shown in Table 2. For example,

many students held the misconception of a gas or

dust layer surrounding the Earth and trapping heat

or solar rays (Table 1, category d). This highlights

the need to teach the scientific concept that green-

house gases are evenly distributed in the atmosphere

(concept 10 in Table 2) and that the ozone layer and

greenhouse gases have interactions with the different

types of radiation (concept 7).

Representations of climate change concepts in science

textbooks. We then reviewed seven Earth and envi-

ronmental science textbooks that are considered to be

commonly used across the United States

(Fulp 2002;

Weiss et al. 2002; see also Table 2). We used the 18 sci-

entific concepts listed in Table 2 to guide our analysis.

Specifically, we analyzed each textbook for

1) the presence or absence of each scientific concept;

2) the presentation, including figures, analogies, and

examples, of each scientific concept; and

3) the sequencing of related scientific concepts.

Finally, we examined the relationships between

the misconceptions about climate change found in

the literature and the presentation of climate change

concepts in the analyzed textbooks. For example,

we identified and discussed ways in which text-

books’ representation of climate change concepts in

textbooks may contribute to or reinforce students’

misconceptions.

results And disCussions. Tables 1 and

2 display the 41 climate change misconceptions held

by middle and high school students and the 18 cor-

responding scientific concepts. The next sections

describe students’ misconceptions identified in the

literature and our analysis of textbooks’ representa-

tions of climate change concepts.

Middle and high school students’ misconceptions of

climate change. Table 1 displays students’ misconcep-

tions about climate change and our classification

system. The literature review indicated that students

were confused about the type and source of radiation

involved in the greenhouse effect (Table 1, category

a). For example, 27.5% of the students, studied in

Koulaidis and Christidou (1999), held the miscon-

ception that UV rays entering the Earth through

the ozone hole are responsible for the greenhouse

effect; other students attributed the greenhouse

effect to heat from the sun (40%) or some type of

solar radiation (7.5%). Such misconceptions lead

students to attribute global warming to increased

incoming solar radiation (Table 1, category j) or

to growing ozone holes (Table 1, category i). For

example, about 50% of the students studied by

Boyes and Stanisstreet (2001) thought that increasing

incoming solar radiation caused global warming.

Quantitative data, such as annual sales and the number of schools and states that adopted the textbooks, were not available.

Also, there is no intended or inferred evaluation, assessment, judgment, or promotion of any textbook’s worthiness or

“correctness” implied in this article. The texts were selected based solely upon their common use and their reach to varying

audiences, and for various purposes, as per each text’s preface.

S. D. Butz, Science of Earth Systems (2004, Delmar Learning).

F. S. Hess and Coauthors, Earth Science: Geology, the Environment, and the Universe,

Student Edition (2005, McGraw-Hill).

A. H. Lapinski and Coauthors, Environmental Science (2003, Addison Wesley Longman).

R. J. Sager and Coauthors, Modern Earth Science (2002, Holt, Rinehart and Winston).

N. E. Spaulding and S. N. Namowitz, Earth Science (2005, McDougal Littell).

E. J. Tarbuck and F. K. Lutgens, Earth Science (2006, Pearson Education).

R. T. Wright, Environmental Science 9th ed. (2005, Pearson Education).

reviewed textbooks

892

july 2010

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

Over 60% of the students in Boyes and Stanisstreet

(1997a) and 35% of the students in Koulaidis and

Christidou (1999) considered the ozone layer (via

various mechanisms) to be responsible for the

increase in global mean temperature. Examples of

these mechanisms included the following: the ozone

hole lets cooler air escape from the Earth (Table 1,

category i), ozone holes allow more solar radiation

to enter the atmosphere (Table 1, category a), or the

ozone layer prohibits radiation from escaping from

the atmosphere into space (Table 1, category d).

Students also held misconceptions about the

types of pollution that can cause climate change. For

example, about half of the students studied by Fisher

(1998) and Pruneau et al. (2001) held the misconcep-

tion that any kind of pollution causes global warming

(Table 1, category h). Similarly, students studied by

Boyes and Stanisstreet (2001) held the misconceptions

Ta b l e 2. The Earth and environmental science textbooks’ coverage of the scientific concepts corresponding

to the students’ misconceptions of climate change. Ad = Addison Wesley Longman; Pe = Pearson Education;

Ho = Holt, Rinehart and Winston; MG = McGraw-Hill companies; MD = McDougal Littell; and De = Delmar

Learning. N = Not covered and Y = Covered.

Scientific concepts corresponding to

the students’ misconceptions of

climate change

The targeted

students’

misconceptions

Textbooks by subjects and publishers

Environmental science (N = 2) Earth science (N = 6)

Ad Pe Pe Ho MG MD De

1) Distinction between weather and climate f N Y Y Y Y Y N

2) Distinction between global warming and

climate change

n Y Y Y N Y Y Y

3) Distinction between greenhouse effect

and climate change

e Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

4) The probable causes of climate change g, h, i, and j N Y Y N Y Y N

5) Distinction between pollution and

greenhouse effects or climate change

h and p N N N N N N N

6) The global temperature change so far l N Y Y N Y Y Y

7) Distinction between the ozone layer

and greenhouse gases in terms of the

interaction with radiation

d, i, m, and o N Y Y Y N N N

8) Climate change is already under way k Y Y N N N N N

9) The major sources and the kinds of

greenhouse gases

c and g Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

10) Distribution of greenhouse gases in the

atmosphere

d N N N Y N N N

11) The mechanism of the greenhouse effect a, d, and e Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

12) Solar irradiation change and its possible

impacts on current climate change

j N Y N N N N N

13) Projections of future climate changes

according to emission scenarios

s N Y N N N N N

14) The dependency of human society on

fossil fuel and barriers to reducing

emission of greenhouse gases

r Y Y N N N N N

15) How to mitigate climate change q Y Y Y N Y Y N

16) Distinction between incoming and

outgoing solar radiation

a and b Y Y Y Y Y N Y

17) Selective absorption of radiation in the

atmospheric gases

c N N Y Y Y N N

18) Distinction between the kinds of

radiation and surface temperature

b N Y Y Y N N Y

893

july 2010AMERICAN METEOROlOGICAl SOCIETy

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

that either acid rain (37%) or nuclear waste (about

60%) cause global warming. About 40% of students

considered greenhouse gases to be air pollutants and

thought that the increase in greenhouse gases would

lead to decreased air quality (Table 1, category c; see

Koulaidis and Christidou 1999).

Many students also consider actions such as

littering or the use of products containing chloro-

fluorocarbons (CFCs) or other environmentally

harmful chemicals to cause global warming (Table 1,

category g) and hold the belief that abstaining from

these actions will help to reduce the potential for

global warming (Table 1, category q). For example,

Boyes and Stanisstreet (2001) found that students

thought using unleaded gasoline (50%) or engaging

in general conservation efforts such as protecting rare

species (30%) to be a solution to global warming.

Most of the reviewed studies reported that many

held the misconception that the greenhouse effect

is caused by a thin layer of dust or gases in the

atmosphere (Table 1, category d). For example, over

60% of students studied by Koulaids and Christidou

(1999) included a thin layer of greenhouse gases or

the ozone layer in the greenhouse effect mechanism.

Examples of related misconceptions included the

belief that there is a thin greenhouse gas layer or a

layer of dust or pollution around the Earth that traps

heat inside, and that atmospheric gases make a barrier

that bounces back the heat from the Earth’s surface.

Figure 1 visualizes examples of the pathways by which

students understand the greenhouse effect and global

warming that were discussed above.

The literature showed a large variability in

students’ understanding of the impacts of climate

change. Many students’ concepts about the impacts of

climate change were limited to temperature increases,

and did not consider the complex feedbacks within

the Earth’s climate system (Table 1, category n). While

only 7.1% of the students studied by Pruneau et al.

(2001) thought that global warming is already serious,

students studied by Gowda et al. (1997) overestimated

the degree of current and future global warming (e.g.,

on an average, students estimated about 7°F increase

to date and 18.4°F by 2050; see Table 1, categories l

and k).

Studies have also sought to assess students’ con-

cepts about socioscientific aspects of climate change

issues (Table 1, categories r and s). About half of the

students studied by Andersson and Wallin (2000)

were not concerned about the dependency of human

society on fossil fuels and showed extremely positive

attitudes toward the implementation of CO

controls.

Conversely, students studied by Pruneau et al. (2001)

believed that there is nothing people can do (about

5% of students) or that people would not be willing

to change their lifestyle (about 70%) to control CO

emissions.

Middle and high school level textbooks’ coverage of the

18 scientific concepts. The textbooks analyzed varied

in their presentation of the climate change concepts

(Table 2). Most of the reviewed textbooks included

basic scientific concepts about the greenhouse ef-

fect and climate change, such as the distinction

between the weather and climate (Table 2, concept

1), between global warming and climate change

(Table 2, concept 2), and between the greenhouse

effect and global warming (Table 2, concept 3);

the degree of the current global mean temperature

increase (Table 2, concept 6); the major sources

and types of greenhouse gases (Table 2, concept

9); the mechanisms of the greenhouse effect (Table

2, concept 11); possible climate change mitigation

strategies (Table 2, concept 15); and the distinction

between incoming and outgoing solar radiation

(Table 2, concept 16).

However, about half of the 18 scientific concepts

of climate change were absent in the majority of

the reviewed textbooks.

Three of the textbooks

neither distinguished

among the types of ra-

diation nor clarified how

surface temperature is re-

lated to and distinct from

infrared radiation (Table

2, concept 18). Four text-

books did not describe the

phenomenon of selective

absorption of radiation in

the atmosphere (Table 2,

concept 17). If students

Fi g . 1. Visualization of students’ misconceptions of the greenhouse effect and

global warming.

894

july 2010

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

have misconceptions about

these two concepts, they

may not recognize either

the need to distinguish

among different types of

radiation to explain the

greenhouse effect (Table 1,

categories a and b) or why

they need to identify the

kinds of greenhouse gases

(Table 1, category c).

Six textbooks did not

specifically mention that

greenhouse gases are dis-

tributed in the atmosphere

(Table 2, concept 10). A

common misconception

of many students is that a

thin gas or dust layer sur-

rounding the Earth traps

heat or solar rays (Table 1,

category d). The textbook

diagrams of the greenhouse

effect appear to perpetuate

this misconception. In the

diagrams, arrows indicate

that terrestrial rays were re-

flected back at a single layer

or point in the atmosphere

(Fig. 2).

Andersson and Wallin

(2000) found that students

neither differentiated be-

tween the greenhouse

effect and air pollution,

nor distinguished between

greenhouse effect and cli-

mate change. Under some

definitions, the increase in greenhouse gases in the air

can be considered a kind of air pollution (i.e., the ab-

normal accumulation of chemicals that threaten the

quality of the environment). However, students’ con-

cepts of pollution are often not sophisticated enough

to differentiate between the disparate effects of tradi-

tional air pollutants, such as soot and other particu-

lates and greenhouse gas pollutants. Once students

consider the greenhouse effect or climate change as a

kind of pollution (the first misconception in Table 1,

category c; the third misconception in Table 1, cat-

egory e) or as a result of pollution (Table 1, category

h), their concept of the greenhouse effect or climate

change seems to be fused into a simple concept of pol-

lution (Boyes and Stanisstreet 1996). Consequently,

they are likely to consider environmentally harmful

actions in general to cause climate change (Table 1,

category g) and environmentally friendly actions in

general to mitigate climate change (Table 1, category

q). No textbook appears to clarify the relationships

between pollution, greenhouse effect, and climate

change in their treatment of these processes (Table 2,

concepts 3 and 5). In fact, textbooks’ juxtaposition

of these concepts may encourage students to equate

these processes, as in the following:

Pollutants can react with water vapor to form acid

precipitation, be trapped by temperature inversion

to cause thick smog, reduce the amount of ozone in

the ozone layer, and contribute to global warming

(McDougal Littell 2005, p. 386).

Fi g . 2. Examples of typical textbook diagrams indicating the greenhouse

effect. [From Butz 2004 and Sager et al. 2002 respectively.]

895

july 2010AMERICAN METEOROlOGICAl SOCIETy

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

The amount of carbon dioxide and other green-

house gases in the atmosphere are rising because of the

pollution caused by human activities . . . Greenhouse

gas pollution may result in global warming (Addison

Wesley Longman 2003, 336–367).

Although this final description of greenhouse gas

pollution includes a chemical formula whereby CO

is produced from combustion of a hydrocarbon (i.e.,

fossil fuels), the use of the generic term pollution

may encourage students to attribute the properties

of particulate air pollution to greenhouse gases and,

thus, consider global warming and climate change to

be a result of particulate air pollution.

Many students attributed global warming to an

increase in incoming solar radiation, the Earth get-

ting closer to the sun or the sun’s rays hitting more

areas of the Earth (Table 1, category j). Only one of

the reviewed textbooks clarified the probable impacts

of changes in incoming solar radiation on the global

mean temperature (Table 2, concept 12). Four text-

books did not clarify the distinction between climate

change and ozone depletion (Table 2, concept 7), even

though many students had difficulty distinguishing

the two issues (Table 1, categories i, m, and o). Seven

textbooks did not describe that climate change is al-

ready underway and has already influenced the Earth

environment (Table 2, concept 8). Thus, these text-

books could reinforce the students’ misconceptions

that in their life time there will be no consequences

of climate change (Table 1, category k).

Students appeared to have a highly diverse view

regarding our ability to control climate change im-

pacts (Table 1, category s). It could be illustrative for

students to understand the different projections of

future global temperature changes depending on the

current and future human actions [e.g., Intergovern-

mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios].

This could help the students appreciate the potential

impact that humans have on climate change and

possible mitigation strategies. Only one textbook

discussed the different climate change scenarios

(Table 2, concept 13) and only one textbook sought

to address the issue of society’s dependence on fossil

fuels and the complexity of CO

control (Table 2,

concept 14).

liMitAtions And iMpliCAtions. We

recognize the nature of this study has the following

several inherent limitations: i) science textbooks are

only a part of climate change educational tools that

are available for middle and high school instruction of

climate change; ii) the quantitative data to qualify the

representativeness of the reviewed textbooks were not

available; iii) the scientific concepts corresponding to

the students’ misconceptions represent the authors’

interpretations only; iv) we used the IPCC Fourth

Assessment Report (Solomon et al. 2007) as a basis

of climate change knowledge, but the textbooks were

published prior to the fourth assessment. Considering

the last point, it is impractical to consider that text-

books can adapt to the knowledge base that evolves

with every IPCC assessment. Therefore, digital ma-

terials, Web portals, and teacher training programs

should supplement textbook materials, which can

allow for more readily available updates.

The writing and reviewing process of science

textbooks should involve the careful consideration

of students’ common misconceptions of climate

change when making decisions about how and what

concepts should be presented. Scientists, science

educators, and publishers should actively create

and take opportunities to communicate with each

other about their knowledge of and perspectives on

climate change science and pedagogically appropri-

ate educational approaches. Future development of

climate change modules and materials should involve

a systematic assessment process in which scientists

and science educators collaborate. Guidance for edu-

cators and learners regarding the choice of science

textbooks, climate change portals, and educational

materials from both the meteorological/climatologi-

cal and science educational research community is

important. The study also implies the importance

of teacher training to equip teachers with sufficient

scientific understandings about climate change so

that science teachers can be in a better position to

guide students’ learning. Science teachers can apply

the findings and implications of this study to build

their teaching of climate change based on students’

prior knowledge.

As stated before, there is no intended or inferred

evaluation, assessment, judgment, or promotion of

any one textbook’s worthiness or correctness implied

in this article. The texts were selected based solely

upon their common use and their reach to varying

audiences, and for various purposes, as per each

text’s preface.

ConClusions And reCoMMendA-

tions. This study reports on the analysis of the

representations of climate change concepts found

in science textbooks and an examination of these

presentations for possible contributions to students’

misconceptions about climate change. We hope this

study will assist textbook publishers and authors in

revising textbook treatment of climate change con-

896

july 2010

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

cepts to minimize possible creation or reinforcement

of students’ misconceptions. When science textbooks

are designed based on a careful consideration of stu-

dents’ misconceptions and actively respond to them,

the textbooks will be more successful in engaging

students and guiding their conceptual development.

In this spirit, we make three primary recommenda-

tions for future treatment of climate change concepts

in science textbooks, discussed below.

Clarification of scientific concepts of climate change.

Scientific concepts that are explained in generic terms

or terms with multiple interpretations are likely to

reinforce students’ existing misconceptions or lead

to the formation of misconceptions by students. For

example, in an attempt to facilitate students’ under-

standings about the greenhouse effect, making an

analogy between the greenhouse effect and a physical

greenhouse is common in many science textbooks

[e.g., Earth Science by Delmar Learning (2004,

268–269) and Environmental Science by Addison

Wesley Longman (2003, p.366)]. If the textbooks do

not clarify the limitations of this analogy, the miscon-

ception that a single layer of gas or dust is responsible

for the greenhouse effect (Table 1, category d) may

be reinforced. Simple and familiar analogies and

descriptions are pedagogically useful and appropri-

ate for younger students; however, without careful

clarification, these helpful analogies and simple

explanations can hinder, rather than help, students’

conceptual development.

Connecting and differentiating scientific concepts.

Students’ misconceptions about climate change are

often due to an inability to connect interrelated

science concepts. For example, students’ misconcep-

tions about the types of radiation involved in the

greenhouse effect and the causes of global warming

are likely formed by a lack of understanding about

selective absorption of radiation by different atmo-

spheric gases. The reviewed textbooks did not make

a link between these related basic scientific concepts

(e.g., the wavelengths and selective absorption in the

atmosphere) and the greenhouse effect. Problems

such as global warming and the ozone layer deple-

tion that students have difficulties in distinguishing

between were not organized in a way that enables

students to compare and contrast them. We rec-

ommend careful organization of content in earth

and environmental textbooks to assist students in

developing well-organized and articulated concepts

of climate change.

Presenting the nature of climate change science. The

presentation of climate change concepts by the re-

viewed Earth and environmental science textbooks

sometimes differed from current scientific perspec-

tives. For example, one Earth science textbook stated

that “researchers are not sure exactly when, if at

all, the Earth’ global climate will begin to change.”

Also, most textbooks attributed sea level rise to ice

melt [e.g., “The melting of sea ice and ice sheets will

also cause a global rise in sea level,” Earth Science

by Pearson Education (2006, p.603); “possible effects

include rising sea levels due to melting polar ice

caps,” Earth Science by McDougal Littell (2005,

p. 382)]. Most of the textbooks did not represent

the complexity of the Earth’s climate system. For

example, one Earth science textbook notes “This

[global temperature increase] could alter the earth’s

weather, cause melting at the polar icecaps, and cause

sea levels to rise” (Holt, Rinehart and Winston 2002,

p. 134). Most of the reviewed texts described the im-

pact of climate change in terms of global warming

and did not address the likely variability of impacts

on regional scales.

The field of climate change science is a dramatic

demonstration of the nature of science. Climate

science assumes that there are principles governing

Earth’s climate system and that the principles can be

understood through thorough and systematic scien-

tific studies. Scientific claims are established based

on evidence. Climate science accepts the uncertainty

of scientific knowledge in which existing knowledge

can be challenged and changed by new observation.

Scientists in climate change science participate in

social decision making by providing up-to-date sci-

entific knowledge and insight into matters of public

concern. Thus, we suggest that future texts should

consider i) explaining the nature of climate change

science explicitly, ii) presenting scientific perspec-

tives with the information on the assessed likelihood

(e.g., by IPCC, see Solomon et al. 2007), and iii) set-

ting the goal to develop students’ ability to judge the

credibility and validity of diverse perspectives on

climate change.

ACKnoWledgMents. The work reported in

this manuscript was supported by the National Science

Foundation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or

recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the

authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

We thank Loran C. Parker for her helpful discussion and

proofreading of the entire manuscript.

897

july 2010AMERICAN METEOROlOGICAl SOCIETy

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC

references

Andersson, B., and A. Wallin, 2000: Students’

understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal

consequences of reducing CO

emissions and the

problem of ozone layer depletion. J. Res. Sci. Teach.,

37, 1096–1111.

Bell, B., 2005: Constructivist view of learning. Learning

in Science: The Waikato Research, B. Bell, Ed.,

Routledge Falmer, 17–38.

Boyes, E., and M. Stanisstreet, 1993: The greenhouse

effect—Children’s perception of causes, consequences

and cures. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 15, 531–552.

—

, and

—

, 1994: The idea of secondary school

children concerning ozone layer damage. Global

Environ. Change, 4, 311–324.

—

, and

—

, 1996: Threats to the global atmospheric

environment: The extent of pupil understanding. Int.

Res. Geogr. Environ. Educ., 5, 186–195.

—

, and

—

, 1997a: Children’s models of understand-

ing of two major global environmental issues (ozone

layer and greenhouse effect). Res. Sci. Technol. Educ.,

15, 19–28.

—

, and

—

, 1997b: The environmental impact of

cars: Children’s ideas and reasoning. Environ. Educ.

Res., 3, 269–282.

—

, and

—

, 1998: High school students’ perceptions

of how major global environmental effects might

cause skin cancer. J. Environ. Educ., 29, 31–36.

—

, and

—

, 2001: Plus ça change, plus c’est la même

chose? School students’ ideas about the “green-

house effect” a decade on. Can. J. Environ. Educ.,

6, 77–101.

—

, D. Chuckran, and M. Stanisstreet, 1993: How do

high school students perceive global climate change:

What are its manifestations? What are its origins?

What corrective action can be taken? J. Sci. Educ.

Technol., 2, 541–557.

—

, M. Stanisstreet, and V. S. Papantoniou, 1999: The

ideas of Greek high school students about the “ozone

layer.” Sci. Educ., 83, 724–737.

Duit, R., 1991: Students’ conceptual frameworks:

Consequences for learning science. The Psychology of

Learning Science, S. Glynn, Y. Russell, and N. Britton,

Eds., Hove and London, 65–85.

Fisher, B., 1998: Australian students’ appreciation of

the greenhouse effect and the ozone hole. Aust. Sci.

J., 44, 46–55.

Fulp, S. L., 2002: Report of the 2000 national survey

of science and mathematics education: Status of

middle school science teaching. Horizon Research

Report, 29 pp. [Available online at http://2000survey.

horizon-research.com/reports/mid_science/mid_

science.pdf.]

Gowda, M. V. R., J. C. Fox, and R. D. Magelky, 1997:

Students’ understanding of climate change: Insights

for scientists and educators. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,

78, 2232–2240.

Koulaidis, V., and V. Christidou, 1999: Models of stu-

dents’ thinking concerning the greenhouse effect and

teaching implications. Sci. Educ., 83, 559–576.

Myers, G., E. Boyes, and M. Stanisstreet, 2004: School

students’ ideas about air pollution: Knowledge and

attitudes. Res. Sci. Technol. Educ., 22, 133–152.

NOAA, 2009: Climate literacy: The essential principles

of climate sciences. 14 pp. [Available online at www.

climate.noaa.gov/education/pdfs/climate_literacy_

poster-final.pdf.]

Österlind, K., 2005: Concept formation in environmen-

tal education: 14-year olds’ work on the intensified

greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone

layer. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 27, 891–908.

Pruneau, D., U. Moncton, L. Liboiron, and E. Vrain,

2001: People’s idea about climate change: A source of

inspiration for the creation of educational programs.

Can. J. Environ. Educ., 6, 58–76.

—

, H. Gravel, W. Courque, and J. Langis, 2003: Ex-

perimentation with a socio-constructivist process

for climate change education. Environ. Educ. Res.,

9, 429–446.

Rickinson, M., 2001: Learners and learning in environ-

mental education: A critical review of the evidence.

Environ. Educ. Res., 7, 207–320.

Rye, J., P. Rubba, and R. Wiesenmayer, 1997: An in-

vestigation of middle school students’ alternative

conceptions of global warming. Int. J. Sci. Educ.,

19, 527–551.

Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis,

K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L. Miller, 2007:

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.

Cambridge University Press, 2056 pp. [Available

online at http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.

html.]

Weiss, I. R., E. R. Banilower, K. C. McMahon, and P. S.

Smith, 2002: Report of the 2000 national survey of

science and mathematics education: Status of second-

ary school earth science teaching. Horizon Research

Rep., 28 pp. [Available online at http://2000survey.

horizon-research.com/reports/sec_earthscience/

sec_earthscience.pdf.]

898

july 2010

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 08/03/24 08:37 PM UTC