Critical Climate Change Education Benefits Kids—It’s Time We Commit to It. Here’s How.

Amidst the escalating climate crises striking New York—from wildfires to floods—you might think that climate education in our schools wouldn’t continue to be sidelined. You might also think, due to the billions of dollars spent in 2023 on funding for various climate-resilient community initiatives and disaster response measures in the United States, in addition to the push to a renewable energy system locally, nationally, and federally through major legislation like the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act to NYC’s own Local Law 154, that teaching effective climate education would have received a corresponding boost in institutional support. You’d be wrong.

Right now, students in NYC public schools average merely two hours of climate-related instruction across all of their core classes annually. This is a significant deficiency in education within New York State, and goes hand-in-hand with the state of current educational practices, which often depict climate change as a peripheral issue at best. And, judging by the numerous climate education bills New York lawmakers have failed to advance, it would seem our policymakers think the topic is already adequately covered in schools.

The value of what youth in the state are missing out on can’t be overstated. Just imagine if all New York students had the chance to receive high-quality climate education by combining science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics (STEAM) skills and cultural ecological knowledge, empowering them—especially youth of color—to innovate, imagine, and build a just and sustainable future. Investing in a new kind of climate education would make this possible.

In my first commentary, I discussed the importance of critical climate change education and began to illustrate the differences between typical climate change education and critical climate change education (CCCE). This stark disparity underscores the necessity for educational reform to implement CCCE, which not only increases environmental literacy but also integrates critical thinking, local relevance, and actionable learning into education systems and teaching practices. In this commentary, I will present the framework for CCCE that I have been developing throughout my work as an educator and now at Next100 as well, where I have been working to illustrate how New York State could become a template for a paradigm shift in climate change education across the country.

The framework is based on a paradigm developed by education researchers Harold R. Hungerford and Rudi L. Volk, then Faculty of Education members at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. In 1990, after significant work to modify and distill a variety of traditional environmental education frameworks, they succeeded in creating a more fundamentally engaged approach to teaching the subject. This approach aims to prepare students more effectively for real-world environmental challenges by linking their education to broader civic readiness initiatives that value the development of a citizenry¹ that’s more informed and action-oriented in how they relate to the environment and climate. What I aim to do, as a step beyond the Hungerford and Volk model, is to more directly fit the needs and realities of marginalized students today by helping them make systems-level connections, such as tying local environmental issues to greater international climate change trends, and emphasizing the connection between local actions and global impacts with analysis on how that impacts everyone (including those who have been historically marginalized). 

If our approaches do not change, we are failing to equip our youth with the knowledge and skills to address and adapt to these changes, and we risk preparing them for a world that is science fiction, rather than the reality they will inhabit.

Laura A. Schifter, a lecturer on education at Harvard, emphasizes that our education approaches need to consider our changing climate and the erosion of normalcy according to the status quo. If our approaches do not change, we are failing to equip our youth with the knowledge and skills to address and adapt to these changes, and we risk preparing them for a world that is science fiction, rather than the reality they will inhabit. Therefore, as the climate crisis worsens, the gap in educational responses that empower the next generation becomes more evident. As such, understanding how to make the form and essential components of climate change education robust, encompassing, and attuned to the realities of their world is key to developing the critical thinkers and civically engaged community members of tomorrow.

What makes the critical climate change education model different?

The typical goal of environmental literacy programs is to impart knowledge on climate science, oftentimes in an outdoor education setting that students travel to in order to spend time there. Though they are doing place-based projects and learning to take action, it can be divorced from forming a framework that emphasizes inquiry-based critical thinking, relevance to students’ lived experiences and realities, and accessible action based where students already are. 

Though Hungerford and Volk use the term “environmental education,” their approach includes a framework that can be applied regardless of place and setting, ultimately creating a synergistic behavioral model. This model demonstrates that the impact of the combined interactive components is greater than their individual component effects. Their seminal work, introduced as “Changing Learner Behavior through Environmental Education” to the 1990 “World Conference on Education for All—Meeting Basic Learning Needs” conference, was pivotal in that it emphasized the need for content to facilitate environmentally responsible behavior (ERB), eventually leading to what they call an environmentally responsible citizen:

…one who has (1) an awareness and sensitivity to the total environment and its allied problems [and/or issues], (2) a basic understanding of the environment and its allied problems [and/or issues], (3) feelings of concern for the environment and motivation for actively participating in environmental improvement and protection, (4) skills for identifying and solving environmental problems [and/or issues], and (5) active involvement at all levels in working toward resolution of environmental problems [and/or issues].

The Hungerford and Volk model is as follows:

What this diagram indicates is that an education program that results in environmentally responsible civic engagement has to have at least one of each of these three components: it must introduce “an empathetic perspective towards nature and the environment” rooted in an understanding of environmental issues and problems; build in-depth knowledge and personal connection to the climate crisis through having felt skin in the game; and provide experience using understanding(s) of the problems and issues, as well as the solutions, to create skill sets to enact solutions through personal agency. 

“School is not a preparation for life, it is life. If we are not preparing students for life, we’ll keep saying, ‘Oh, they’re too young,’ all the way until they are up out of high school. And, by then, we’d have deprived them of the very skills we demand they develop on their own when we’ve never provided the pathways to build up agency.” —Trudi L. Volk

I extend Hungerford and Volk’s model to create the tenets for critical climate change education by more explicitly integrating the lived experiences of students and linking local events to global systems and structures of power. CCCE, therefore, focuses on the intersections of environmental issues with various axes of oppression and justice, offering a holistic and transformative approach to learning. As Dr. Trudi L. Volk (of the Hungerford and Volk team) summarizes: “School is not a preparation for life, it is life. If we are not preparing students for life, we’ll keep saying, ‘Oh, they’re too young,’ all the way until they are up out of high school. And, by then, we’d have deprived them of the very skills we demand they develop on their own when we’ve never provided the pathways to build up agency.” That’s why I incorporate the revered education pedagogies social-emotional learning (SEL), culturally-relevant education (CRE), and civic readiness into the application of CCCE to ground the framework in real-world applications that can cater to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) student populations.

Social–Emotional Learning (SEL)

Firstly, Hungerford and Volk’s approach names environmental empathy and sensitivity as the foundation for establishing ERB, tenets with which SEL shares much in common: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making.

Within the model, cultivating “environmental sensitivity,” or care about and for the environment, is a major aspect; but there are other aspects, such as degendering emotions, so that students feel comfortable expressing themselves; knowledge of ecology; and developing a nuanced and critical understanding of the role of pollution, technology, and economics. All of these elements play supplemental roles in developing emotional regulation, ethics, communication skills, and social responsibility. In many ways, these SEL tenets tie to larger benefits for students, including the following:

• Mental health: Helps in reducing anxiety, depression, and other emotional distress.
• Behavioral outcomes: Promotes positive behaviors and reduces conduct problems.
• Life skills: Enhances skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and resilience.

Typical approaches to climate education may hold understandable concerns about introducing climate change, fearing that it will induce stress and anxiety. But these approaches respond by deciding to touch on it only in passing, or to avoid the subject altogether. In contrast, CCCE delves into emotions to encourage emotional regulation, so that it is done with intention. Students may document their feelings about climate change in journals, which are then followed by group discussions that help these same students process their emotions and foster a supportive community. Recognizing their shared concerns, students may be more inclined and motivated to support each other and feel less isolated in their worries. 

Culturally Relevant Education (CRE)

Secondly, Hungerford and Volk’s approach names connection and personal investment as the foundation for establishing ERB, with which CRE shares much in common: cultural competence, belief in the capability of all students’ academic success, cultural relevance, critical consciousness, inclusive curriculum, responsive pedagogy, community and family engagement, student-centered learning, empowerment, and reflective practice. 

Within the model, cultivating in-depth knowledge and/or understanding of the issues and problems at hand plays a critical role in cultivating a sense of ownership alongside personal investment, feeling like they have a tangible and meaningful personal stake; knowledge of the consequences of inaction or inadequate action; and personal commitment as supplemental roles in forming an opinion. In many ways, these CRE tenets tie to the following larger benefits for students:

• Equity and inclusion: It helps to address and reduce educational disparities by valuing and leveraging the cultural assets of all students.
• Social-emotional development: CRE supports students’ social and emotional development by affirming their identities and fostering a sense of belonging.
• Community strengthening: Strengthens the ties between schools and the communities they serve, enhancing mutual respect and understanding.

Typical approaches to climate education may discuss greenhouse gasses, but choosing to focus purely on their scientific aspects—what they are and how they affect the ozone layer. In contrast, in CCCE, the exploration of the production of these gasses is linked to industrial practices that disproportionately affect low-income neighborhoods, where factories are often located. Furthermore, a study of a local community that organized a campaign to monitor and report emissions from a nearby plant can be utilized to instill a real-world connection, not only clarifying the concept but empowering students to see how knowledge could spur community action and policy change.

Civic Readiness

Thirdly, Hungerford and Volk’s approach identifies combining a sense of personal agency with the necessary tools and resources for making change as the foundation for establishing ERB. The civic readiness model shares much in common with this framework: general civic knowledge and skills-building, encouraging attitudes of participation and engagement in-person and digitally, understanding rights and responsibilities, community awareness, decision-making, global awareness and connection, and identity development. 

Within the model, cultivating knowledge and skill in using environmental strategies, having a strong internal locus of control, and setting a strong intention to act are all major contributors to empowerment, supplemented by the in-depth knowledge of issues within the category. In many ways, these civic readiness tenets tie into the following larger benefits for students:

• Enhanced participation: Students are more likely to participate in civic activities, such as voting and community service.
• Critical thinking: Encourages students to critically analyze societal issues and make informed decisions.
• Social responsibility: Instills a sense of responsibility toward contributing to the welfare of the community and society.
• Civic equality: Promotes an understanding of equity and justice within civic contexts.

Typical approaches to climate education might be limited to teaching students how to recycle and conserve water and electricity. In contrast, in CCCE, this would be extended to analyze how civic engagement can influence environmental policies. Students could engage with local environmental activists, and later conduct a mock city council meeting to debate a proposed bill on reducing plastic use. This exercise would demonstrate the impact of civic involvement and encourage students to participate in their communities.

Implementing critical climate change education can be intuitive.

Implementing CCCE does not have to be rocket science. Instead, it can look as simple as following the New York State Education Department’s current standards and leveraging policy to call for the uplifting of examples of how to integrate climate change concepts across subject areas. This way, students learning to read at grade level can read about topics that are affecting them every day, all without mandating a new curriculum overhaul. 

To offer an example of what implementing an interdisciplinary use of climate concepts could look like while leveraging the curricular requirements already in place, let’s consider a student body whose school is located within a food desert—a common urban design and policy ramification of historically segregated planning. The result perpetuates a lack of access to fresh, healthy foodstuffs, which in turn adversely affects the health and well-being of many communities, but communities of color in particular.

In this case, the educator can do a walking activity with said students around the neighborhood, working to identify the number of fresh, green, and healthy food grocery stores, mom and pop shops, and/or bodegas available to them. This exercise is easy to integrate into existing New York State health education standards—that is,”understand the relationships among diet, health, and physical activities”—as a way of identifying circumstances that can help or hinder healthy decision making when given healthy and unhealthy alternatives, as well as the potential short-term impact of each alternative on self and others (Standard 1 – Personal Health and Fitness: Family and Consumer Sciences). Furthermore, students can then “Introduce a precise claim, acknowledge and distinguish the claim(s) from a counterclaim, and organize the reasons and evidence logically” in order to form informed opinions around what they observe based on their neighborhood, borough, or city (Eighth-Grade Writing Standards | 8W1a). Finally, students can also create opportunities for social-emotional learning by having students “Identify how their personal strengths, challenges, experiences, and identities influence choices and outcomes” (SEL Benchmark Middle School (6-8), 1B.3a.) encouraging agency and choice. Teachers who have been particularly interested in social justice have also been able to incorporate local Indigenous, organizing, and artistic wisdom through guest storytelling hours, public murals in their schools and/or communities, and gardening on campus or in tandem with a local community garden: these efforts all dovetail perfectly with CCCE.

The benefits of CCCE go far beyond the classroom.

Ultimately, by not proactively providing our next generation with the necessary tools, skills, and resources for change-making on one of the most existential issues of our time, we are depriving it of the opportunity to effectively address and navigate the pressing challenges and complexities of our rapidly changing world. Critical climate change education profoundly reshapes how students perceive and engage with the world. By intertwining climate education with tangible real-world issues, CCCE fosters a deepened understanding and cultivates a proactive stance towards environmental challenges. This educational approach is pivotal in developing informed and civically engaged community members ready to take meaningful actions for a sustainable and equitable future. The integration of CCCE not only enhances educational outcomes but also bolsters cultural, social-emotional, and leadership development among students, thereby preparing them to lead in combating climate change. 

Additionally, when CCCE is combined with other educational frameworks such as culturally relevant education, tolerance education, ethnic studies, and civics education, it not only imparts crucial real-world skills, but also significantly improves student engagement, attendance, and overall educational experience. In a forthcoming article, I will explore how states like California and New Jersey are pioneering the expansion of climate change education that incorporates these critical elements, setting a precedent for national educational strategies.

Get involved!

If you would like to work with me to build out this framework of understanding and visualizing impactful critical climate change education, and/or be a part of a community of practice that is interested in influencing policy, you can get in touch with me here.

1. In developing and describing their model, Hungerford and Volk use “citizen” and its variants without discussion of the word’s legal implications. While I don’t know the authors’ original intentions, I very much disagree with the usage’s implication—that civic engagement is not only the prerogative, but also the privilege of citizens alone, and not of the millions of deeply committed members of communities across this country who do not hold that legal status. I strive to use terms that honor that fact instead wherever appropriate in the piece.