Examining the Impact of an Informal Climate Change Education Community of Practice

• In Event: Enacting Systemic Climate Change Education: Maryland and Delaware Climate Change Education, Assessment and Research (MADE CLEAR) Research and Practice for a Changing Planet

Abstract

A significant amount of learning occurs outside of formal school and work settings (Falk and Dierking 2010), and thus educators at informal learning organizations are a critical component of any comprehensive climate change education endeavor. However, many informal educators lack training to address this complex environmental issue (Stylinski et al. 2014) and often have limited access to professional development. One solution is the formation of a community of practice (CoP)—a sustained learning partnership with regularly interacting members who have a commitment to a shared domain. As part of MADE CLEAR, we are fostering a CoP focused on informal climate change education (called ICCE) and examining how it supports strategies leading to effective multi-state climate change education in informal education settings.

Our theoretical framework centers on communities of practice, which, unlike most professional development models, promote inquiry experiences with others, (e.g., Wenger 1998) and are bounded by a shared identity founded on interest and intrinsic value expectations (O’Donnell et al. 2003). Our work has also been informed by research on effective use of reflection to transform identities and practices of informal educators in a CoP (Ash et al. 2012). We used reflective practice to promote community development through guided instruction and discussions focused on philosophy, context, content, prior experiences, and other internal data (Schön 1983). We then helped ICCE members form a “shared practice” by gradually increasing the focus on climate change education content and pedagogical practices (e.g., framing climate change messages (Bales 2009)).

Our mixed method study incorporates both process decision data and impact data collected from CoP members. Data sources are a baseline questionnaire, community network questionnaire, practice strategy worksheet, CoP meeting discussions and products, and reports of members’ collaborative projects.

Using social network analysis, we have found relationships within the ICCE community almost doubled (112 to 201) and the community network’s binary density (reported relationships to potential relationships) increased from 11 to 20%. We examined the value of these relationships on eight member-defined outcomes of climate change education practice and saw the average value of relationships significantly increased (2.4 to 2.9 on 4-point scale, p<0.001). We also found expansion of members’ climate change education efforts. Baseline data revealed climate change is quite limited—typically only briefly included as one of many environmental issues. However, currently, more than half of ICCE members are collaborating on efforts directly seeking to enhance climate change understanding and action, as well as practice (e.g., leading educator/teacher workshops, demonstrating impacts and solutions at local festivals, and guiding youth through field-based investigations).

These findings indicate the ICCE community is functioning as a CoP that is nurturing and creating relationships, which are enhancing members’ reflective climate change education practice. As such, our study reinforces the advantages of a CoP to promote greater responsibility for collaboration, to build relationships across diverse informal education institutions, and advance practice within organizations. It also increases understanding of the role of reflective practice in CoP as a mechanism to enhance professional development.

Authors

• Cathlyn D. Stylinski, University of Maryland

• Sasha D. Palmquist, Institute for Learning Innovation

• Joe Heimlich, Center of Science and Industry

• Deborah Wasserman, Center of Science and Industry