“Carbon literacy practices”: textual footprints between school and home in children's construction of knowledge about climate change

Abstract

This paper examines the notion of “carbon literacy practices” through reporting on a small research project aimed at understanding how children make sense of climate change, and their subsequent related practices at school, at home, and in the community. Drawing on a background in New Literacy Studies [e.g. Barton, D., Hamilton, M., and Ivanic, R., 2000. Situated literacies. London: Routledge; Satchwell, C., and Ivanic, R., 2009. Textual mediation of learning in Further Education. In: M.S. Thorpe, G. Biesta and R.G. Edwards, eds. Rethinking contexts for learning and teaching. London: Routledge; Satchwell, C., and Ivanic, R., 2010. Reading and writing the self as a college student: fluidity and ambivalence across contexts. In: K. Ecclestone, G. Biesta and M. Hughes, eds. Lost in transition? Change and becoming through the lifecourse. London: Routledge Falmer], the paper explores the relationships among children's understanding of climate change, their literacy practices in relation to climate change, and their environmental social practices. Data are included from a project involving children and their families from three primary schools – with and without “eco-school” status, which asked: What and how do children learn about climate change at school? What and how do they learn at home and outside of school? How do these kinds of learning relate to each other? How is what they learn put into practice? Put simply, how might children become “carbon literate” citizens? In addition, the paper interrogates the notion of children as agents of change. The concept of children influencing the behaviour of others sounds convincing, but is based on a straightforward model, described by Shove [2010. Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1273–1285] as the ABC model – which is considered an effective strategy in health care (stopping parents smoking) and in marketing (persuading parents to buy certain products), but is not necessarily transferable to other contexts. Further, it is clear from work in literacy studies and education [Reinking, D., et al. eds., 1998. Handbook of literacy and technology: transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc; Gee, J., 2003. What video games have to teach us about literacy and learning. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan; Tuomi-Gröhn, T., and Engeström, Y., eds., 2003. Between school and work: new perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing. Amsterdam: Pergamon; Ivanič, R., et al., 2009. Improving Learning in College. London: Taylor & Francis] that the transfer of linguistic and semiotic signs is by no means equivalent to the transfer of knowledge, values or functions. In other words, a school lesson or a computer game about climate change and its effects does not automatically mean that a child will turn the lights off at home. The paper considers these issues with reference to qualitative data collected from observations, conversations on “Twitter”, focus groups, and individual interviews.