Advertisement

Climate ChangeS Cities—A Project to Enhance Students’ Evaluation and Action Competencies Concerning Climate Change Impacts on Cities

  • Katharina Feja
  • Svenja Lütje
  • Lena NeumannEmail author
  • Leif Mönter
  • Karl-Heinz Otto
  • Alexander Siegmund
Chapter
  • 691 Downloads
Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)

Abstract

Concerning the social acceptance and realization of adaptation strategies, a raising awareness on the impacts of climate change among the population is indispensable, especially among young people as future decision makers. In this context, the article presents the structure and implementation of the environmental education project “Klimawandel findet Stadt” (Climate changeS cities), carried out in cooperation between the universities of Bochum, Heidelberg and Trier. The project shall facilitate the development of students’ evaluation and action competencies with regard to climate change consequences and sustainable adaptation strategies by using a new educational concept of climate change communication. It implies the design of learning modules with an emphasis on health and risk prevention, urban climate and planning, and urban ecology and biodiversity. External stakeholders, e.g. biological stations, environmental departments and municipal offices, are involved in the planning and implementation of the above mentioned modules leading to an enhanced cross-sectoral cooperation of institutions. The methodical approach of the project is based on the dialectical intertwining of a three-step approach of spheres, namely observation sphere, laboratory sphere and sphere of action. In the spheres, students are confronted cognitively and affectively with climate change. Thereby, students shall be enabled and motivated to understand, evaluate and communicate climate adaptation strategies. As the concept is so far only normatively justified, there is need for empirical evidence of its effectiveness. In order to address this need, three efficacy studies are designed. If the methodical-didactical concept proves to be efficient, it could be implemented as a new form of climate change communication in educational institutions.

Keywords

Climate adaptation Climate change Education for sustainable development Climate change education Inquiry-based learning Student laboratories/labs 

References

  1. Ausubel DP (1962) Learning by discovery. Educ Leadersh 20(2). Washington: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, pp 113–117Google Scholar
  2. BfN—Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (ed) (2006) Biologische Vielfalt und Klimawandel – Gefahren, Chancen, Handlungsoptionen (BfN-Skripten 148), Bonn. https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/service/skript148.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  3. Bogner FX, Kaiser FG (2012) Umweltbewusstsein, ökologisches Verhalten und Umweltwissen: Modell einer Kompetenzstruktur für die Umweltbildung, In: Bayrhuber H, Harms U, Muszynski B, Ralle B, Rothgangel M, Schön L-H, Vollmer HJ, Weigand H-G (ed) Formate Fachdidaktischer Forschung: Empirische Projekte – historische Analysen – theoretische Grundlegungen (Fachdidaktische Forschungen, vol. 2), Münster: Waxmann, pp 163–182Google Scholar
  4. Bruner JS (1961) The act of discovery. Harvard Educ Rev 31(1). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, pp 21–32Google Scholar
  5. Chiari S, Völler S, Mandl S (2016) Wie lassen sich Jugendliche für Klimathemen begeistern? Chancen und Hürden in der Klimakommunikation, GW-Unterricht 141(1). Wien: Forum Wirtschaftserziehung, pp 5–18Google Scholar
  6. DESTATIS—Federal Statistical Office of Germany (ed) (2016) Statistisches Jahrbuch Deutschland und Internationales 2016, Wiesbaden. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/StatistischesJahrbuch/StatistischesJahrbuch2016.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  7. DGfG—German Society for Geography (ed) (2014) Bildungsstandards im Fach Geographie für den Mittleren Schulabschluss mit Aufgabenbeispielen, 8th revised and updated version. DGfG, BonnGoogle Scholar
  8. EC—European Commission (2015a) LIFE and climate change mitigation. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  9. EC—European Commission (2015b) LIFE and climate change adaptation. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  10. EEA—European Environment Agency (2016) Urban adaptation to climate change in Europe 2016Transforming cities in a changing climate. CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  11. EEA—European Environment Agency (2017) Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016. An indicator-based report. CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  12. Federal Cabinet of Germany (2008) German Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change adopted by the Federal Cabinet on 17 December 2008, Executive Summary. http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu-import/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/das_gesamt_bf.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  13. Federal Cabinet of Germany (2011) Adaptation action plan of the German strategy for adaptation to climate change, adopted by the German Federal Cabinet on 31st August 2011. http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu-import/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/aktionsplan_anpassung_klimawandel_en_bf.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  14. Fishbein M (1997) Einstellung und die Vorhersage des Verhaltens. In: Hormuth SE (ed) Sozialpsychologie der Einstellung. Athenäum Hain Scriptor Hanstein, Königstein, TsGoogle Scholar
  15. Hemmer I, Hemmer M (eds) (2010) Schülerinteresse an Themen, Regionen und Arbeitsweisen des Geographieunterrichts. Ergebnisse der empirischen Forschung und deren Konsequenzen für die Unterrichtspraxis (Geographiedidaktische Forschungen 46). Hochschulverband für Geographie und ihre Didaktik e.V, WeingartenGoogle Scholar
  16. IPCC—International Panel on Climate Change (2014a) Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer, S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx J C (ed)], IPCC, Cambridge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. IPCC—International Panel on Climate Change (2014b) Synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (ed)]. IPCC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobeit J (2007) Zusammenhänge und Wechselwirkungen im Klimasystem. In: Endlicher W, Gerstengarbe F-W (eds) Der Klimawandel – Einblicke. Rückblicke und Ausblicke, Berlin, Potsdam, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  19. Kaiser FG (1998) A general measure of ecological behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol 28(5). Washington: Wiley-Blackwell, pp 395–422Google Scholar
  20. Kaiser FG, Wilson M (2004) Goal-directed conservation behavior: the specific composition of a general performance. Personal Individ Differ 36(7). Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp 1531–1544Google Scholar
  21. Kaiser FG, Oerke B, Bogner FX (2007) Behavior-based environmental attitude: development of an instrument for adolescents. J Environ Psychol 27(3). Amsterdam, London: Elsevier, pp 242–251Google Scholar
  22. Kaiser FG, Roczen N, Bogner FX (2008) Competence formation in environmental education: advancing ecology-specific rather than general abilities 2(12). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers, pp 56–70Google Scholar
  23. Katzenstein H (1995) Umweltbewusstsein und Umweltverhalten. Fernuniversität-Gesamthochschule, HagenGoogle Scholar
  24. KM-BW—Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports Baden-Wuerttemberg (2016) Gemeinsamer Bildungsplan der Sekundarstufe I. Bildungsplan 2016. Geographie. Neckar Verlag, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  25. Lazonder, AW, Harmsen R (2016) Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: effects of guidance. Rev Educ Res 86(3). Washington: Thousand Oaks, pp 681–718Google Scholar
  26. Lehmann J (1999) Befunde empirischer Forschung zu Umweltbildung und Umweltbewusstsein. Leske + Budrich, OpladenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewin K (1936) Principles of topological psychology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li M (2017) Zweitsprachförderung im frühen naturwissenschaftlichen Lernen. Linguistisch hochwertige Formate und interaktive Elemente der Unterrichtskommunikation. Beltz, Weinheim, BaselGoogle Scholar
  29. McClelland DC (1987) Human motivation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Milner J, Davies M, Wilkinson P (2012) Urban energy, carbon management (low carbon cities) and co-benefits for human health. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 4(4). Amsterdam, London: Elsevier, pp 398–404Google Scholar
  31. Moser SC (2010) Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions, WIREs climate change, vol 1. Wiley-Blackwell, pp 31–53Google Scholar
  32. Moser SC (2014) Communicating adaption to climate change: the art and science of public engagement when climate change comes home, WIREs climate change 5(3). Wiley-Blackwell, pp 337–358Google Scholar
  33. Murray HA (1938) Explorations in personality. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. MWWK-RLP—Ministry of Education, Science, Further Education and Culture of Rhineland-Palatinate (2016) Lehrplan für die gesellschaftswissenschaftlichen Fächer. Erdkunde, Geschichte, Sozialkunde. MF-Druckservice, MainzGoogle Scholar
  35. Otto K-H, Schuler S (2012) Pädagogisch-psychologische Ansätze. In: Haversath J-B (moderator), Geographiedidaktik, Theorie - Themen - Forschung, Westermann, Braunschweig, pp 133–164Google Scholar
  36. Pew Research Center (2017) Globally, People Point to ISIS and Climate Change as Leading Security Threats. Concern about cyberattacks, world economy also widespread. http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/08/01/globally-people-point-to-isis-and-climate-change-as-leading-security-threats/. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  37. Rheinberg F, Vollmeyer R, Burns BD (2001) FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktueller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen (Langversion, 2001). Diagnostica, 47(2) Göttingen, Bern: Hogrefe, pp 57–66Google Scholar
  38. Rheinberg F (2004) Motivationsdiagnostik. Hogrefe, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  39. Schick A (2001) Umweltbewusstsein. In: Schulz WF (ed) Lexikon Nachhaltiges Wirtschaften. Oldenbourg, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  40. Schön L-H (2011) Vorbemerkungen. Empirische Fundierung in den Fachdidaktiken. Ergebnisse einer Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Fachdidaktik. In: Bayrhuber H, Harms U, Muszynski B, Ralle B, Rothgangel M, Schön, L-H, Vollmer HJ, Weigand H-G (ed) Empirische Fundierung in den Fachdidaktiken (Fachdidaktische Forschungen, vol. 1), Waxmann, Münster, p 7Google Scholar
  41. Spada H (1990) Umweltbewusstsein: Einstellung und Verhalten. In: Kruse L, Grauman Friedrich C, Lantermann DE (ed) Ökologische Psychologie. Psychologie Verlags.-Union, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  42. UBA—Federal Environmental Agency (2015) Monitoringbericht 2015 zur Deutschen Anpassungsstrategie an den Klimawandel. Bericht der Interministeriellen Arbeitsgruppe Anpassungsstrategie der Bundesregierung. Dessau-Roßlau. https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/376/publikationen/monitoringbericht_2015_zur_deutschen_anpassungsstrategie_an_den_klimawandel.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2017
  43. UN—United Nations (2017) New urban agenda. Quito: UN. http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/NUA-English.pdf. Accessed 8 Sept 2017
  44. UNESCO—United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2010) Climate change education for sustainable development, Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001901/190101E.pdf. Accessed 6 Sept 2017
  45. UNESCO—United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2014) UNESCO roadmap for implementing the global action programme on education for sustainable development. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  46. Vollmeyer R (2005) Einführung: Ein Orientierungsschema zur Integration verschiedener Motivationskomponenten. In: Vollmeyer R, Brunstein J (eds) Motivationspsychologie und ihre Anwendung. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, pp 9–19Google Scholar
  47. WBGU—German Advisory Council on Global Change (2011) World in transition—A social contract for sustainability, flagship report 2011. WBGU, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  48. WBGU—German Advisory Council on Global Change (2016) Humanity on the move: unlocking the transformative power of cities, flagship report 2016. WBGU, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilde M, Bätz K, Kovaleva A, Urhahne D (2009) Überprüfung einer Kurzskala intrinsischer Motivation (KIM), Testing a short scale of motivation, Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, vol 15. Springer Spektrum, Wiesbaden, pp 31–45Google Scholar
  50. Wilhelmi V (2011) Geographische Umweltbildung weiterdenken, Praxis Geographie, vol 2. Braunschweig, Westermann, pp 4–8Google Scholar
  51. Winiwarter V, Schmid M (2008) Umweltgeschichte als Untersuchung sozionaturaler Schauplätze? Ein Versuch, Johannes Colers “Oeconomia” umwelthistorisch zu interpretieren. In: Knopf T (ed) Umweltverhalten in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Vergleichende Ansätze. Attempto, Tübingen, pp 158–173Google Scholar
  52. Wittig R, Kuttler W, Tackenberg O (2012) Urban-industrielle Lebensräume. In: Mosbrugger V, Brasseur G, Schaller M, Stribrny B (eds) Klimawandel und Biodiversität: Folgen für Deutschland. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, pp 290–307Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katharina Feja
    • 1
  • Svenja Lütje
    • 2
  • Lena Neumann
    • 3
    Email author
  • Leif Mönter
    • 2
  • Karl-Heinz Otto
    • 1
  • Alexander Siegmund
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Didactics of GeographyRuhr-UniversityBochumGermany
  2. 2.Trier University, Geography and Its DidacticsTrierGermany
  3. 3.Research Group for Earth Observation (rgeo), Department of GeographyHeidelberg University of EducationHeidelbergGermany
  4. 4.Heidelberg Center for the Environment and Institute for Geography, Heidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations