Misconceptions: Barriers to Improved Climate Literacy

Abstract

Improved science and climate literacy are needed for planetary citizens to better understand the implications of global change and related Earth system feedbacks. Unfortunately, misconceptions about climate system functioning can be reinforced and become ingrained. Such mistaken beliefs present a barrier that must be broken down in order to improve climate literacy. This contribution addresses three examples of common misconceptions contributing to scientific and climate illiteracy, with an emphasis on inappropriate conceptual models or the inappropriate application of reasonably good models. However, identifying a problematic concept or misconception and providing an alternative explanation is not enough. Confrontational methods in which traditional answers are shown to be in conflict with the scientific observations have generally failed to assist in advancing climate literacy. What is needed is the creation of a learning environment wherein students can practice scientific thinking. Communication among peers has been shown as an effective method to help students realize that science is about thinking critically and asking questions, especially when observations do not fit an ingrained idea. Especially challenging are emergent concepts, those where the outcome is the result of a number of interacting processes and the net result is not directly obvious. The three emergent process misconceptions addressed in this paper are the applicability of the 3-cell model of global circulation, ocean circulation as the cause of mild European winters, and a rain shadow as the reason for a semi-arid climate in eastern Colorado. It is hoped that this presentation of three emergent process misconceptions and the related discussion regarding more appropriate instructional methods will eventually assist with improving climate literacy.