Source: NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV submitted to
ENSURING READINESS FOR CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND CHANGE BY LEVERAGING THE POWER OF YOUNGER GENERATIONS
Sponsoring Institution
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Project Status
TERMINATED
Funding Source
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
1008610
Grant No.
2016-67012-24682
Project No.
NCZ09482
Proposal No.
2015-03506
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
A7201
Project Start Date
Jan 1, 2016
Project End Date
Dec 31, 2017
Grant Year
2016
Project Director
Stevenson, K.
Recipient Organization
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV
(N/A)
RALEIGH,NC 27695
Performing Department
Forestry and Env. Resources
Non Technical Summary
Among the agricultural and natural resource sciences for climate variability and change, education is vital as it can increase climate change knowledge and risk perception, precursors to climate change action. Education is critical among the agricultural community because although climate change threatens agricultural sustainability, skepticism of anthropogenic climate change runs high. Reaching agricultural audiences can be challenging because worldview-driven biases can prevent agricultural professionals from engaging in adaptation or mitigation efforts. Providing worldview-compatible climate curricula to K-12 agricultural classrooms may be a key strategy. Agriculture teachers have considerable influence over future agricultural and natural resource professionals, and adolescents may be less susceptible to worldview-driven biases. This project will leverage robust agricultural education and natural resource programs at NCSU along with the AFRI-funded Southeastern Forests and Climate Change (SFCC) module to provide teachers with a worldview-neutral resource that integrates climate change topics into existing Agricultural Science curriculum. My goal is to build climate change knowledge and risk perception among future agricultural and natural resource professionals through education. Specifically, I will train high school agriculture teachers in the SFCC module (extension), engage natural resource and agricultural education undergraduates in a robust service-learning program delivering SFCC lessons and measuring impacts (education), and test if engagement with the SFCC module increases climate change knowledge and risk perception among all participants regardless of worldview (research). Through these activities, this project will make progress in ensuring agricultural and natural resources professionals are fully equipped to ensure the sustainability of agroecosystems in the face of a changing climate.
Animal Health Component
0%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
10%
Applied
90%
Developmental
0%
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
8060430308050%
9030430307050%
Goals / Objectives
The overall project goal is to build climate change knowledge and risk perception among future agricultural and natural resource professionals through education. Associated with this major goal are sub-goals related to education, extension, and research. The education goal is to foster a partnership between the natural resource education and the agricultural education communities to build climate change knowledge and risk perception among high school agriculture students and teachers and NCSU undergraduates. The extension goal is to increase the capacity of agricultural education teachers to address climate change. The research goal is to investigate the potential for agricultural education to build climate change knowledge and risk perception among diverse groups of teachers and students.As these goals are integrated, objectives span across each goal area. Specifically, objectives of recruiting and training 40 high school agriculture teachers in the PLT SFCC module include 1) developing marketing materials and workshops employing strategic framing to reach agriculture teachers (extension), 2) increasing self-efficacy in teaching climate change among high school agriculture teachers (education), 3) reaching 2,000 high school agriculture students over two years (extension), 3) increasing climate change knowledge among high school teachers and students (education), and 4) testing whether SFCC training and implementation increases climate change knowledge and risk perception among both high school teachers and students regardless of worldview and other demographic variables (e.g., gender, ethnicity, teacher experience and training) (research). Objectives associated with engaging 200 undergraduates in a robust service-learning research experience involving training in and delivery and evaluation of the SFCC module include 1) increasing climate change knowledge among NCSU natural resource students and pre-service agriculture teachers (education); 2) increasing self-efficacy in teaching climate change among pre-service agriculture teachers (education); 3) increasing likelihood that natural resource undergraduates will engage in education and extension activities aimed at K-12 agricultural education in their future careers (education/extension); 4) increasing knowledge among all participating NCSU undergraduates of social science research methods, including survey design, sampling, data collection, and analysis (education); 5) engaging a minimum of twelve undergraduates and eight graduate students in the data collection, analysis, and publication process (education), and 6) testing whether the service-learning experience increases climate change knowledge and risk perception among undergraduates regardless of worldview and other demographic variables (e.g., gender, ethnicity, teacher experience and training) (research). Communication efforts include the objective of 1) disseminating implications of all project activities and research findings to natural resource Extension professionals through the CFW COP and environmental educators through the North American Association of Environmental Education (NAAEE) (extension).
Project Methods
Sampling and recruitment. I will evaluate impacts of the SFCC module using a pretest-posttest control-group experimental design. I will recruit a minimum of 40 teachers into the two-year study by advertising through listservs, at agricultural education conferences, and by phone calls and e-mails. Consenting teachers will be randomly assigned to receive training in the SFCC module in fall 2015 (treatment group) or fall 2016 (control group in year 1). The proposed method ensures that I will engage with teachers who are interested in the project, and the random assignment into treatment and control groups ensures a valid examination of SFCC module impacts. Teachers from both the treatment and control groups (n = 40) will be asked to include at least one of their classes in the study, which will automatically enroll approximately 1,000 students in the study each year, assuming teachers include an average of 25 of their students (a conservative estimate based on my experience). Over the course of the study, teachers will either receive the treatment in year one or year two. After year one, I will evaluate impacts of the SFCC module with a treatment-control design. After year two, I will evaluate impacts of the SFCC module with a time-series analysis (comparing teachers with two years of experience with the module to those with only one). To recruit both undergraduate samples (pre-service agriculture teachers and natural resource students), I will include students enrolled in two natural resource capstone courses and two agricultural education classes. All students enrolled in these courses will comprise the treatment group (n = average of 25 students per class per year, or 200 students total). The control group will consist of students not enrolled in these classes but matriculating in the same programs at the same grade levels as those in the treatment groups. The pre- and post-tests will be administered with the control group with assistance from program directors.Training, Curriculum Delivery, and Service Learning Component. In the fall semesters, I will work with Renee Strnad (NC PLT coordinator) to train the treatment group of high school agriculture teachers. In year one, only the treatment group of teachers (n = 20) will receive the training. In year two, the year one control group (n = 20) will be invited to participate in the training. Teacher training will include six SFCC activities aligned with agriculture curricula. All trained teachers will be asked to deliver a minimum of four SFCC lessons in one of their classes. With cooperation from course instructors, the service-learning project will be fully integrated into each undergraduate class (FOR 404, NR 400, and AEE 206 and 426) and aligned with course objectives. Students will be introduced to the SFCC module and service-learning project objectives before attending a six-hour Saturday training in three SFCC activities. In groups of 3-4 students, they will be assigned one high school agriculture classroom and will coordinate data collection for the pre- and post-tests and conduct a minimum of one SFCC lesson with high school classes in the treatment group. Students will be required to update an online group journal linked to the service-learning project monthly and complete a critical reflection writing exercise to foster critical thinking and reflexive practice. I will guide all undergraduates through preliminary data analysis and presentation of preliminary results in a public forum (e.g., departmental seminar). For a timeline of all efforts, see Table 1.Table 1. Timeline of all project effortsMajor EffortsFall 2015Write and pretest survey instruments; recruit high school agriculture teachers; complete high school agriculture teacher pre-survey; train 20 high school agriculture teachers in SFCC module; plan undergraduate service-learning project; disseminate project updates through CFW COP, professional website and social media.Spring 2016Implement undergraduate service-learning project in two NR and two AEE classes including training, delivery, and evaluation of SFCC module; agricultural education teachers implement SFCC module; complete high school agriculture teacher post-survey; complete pre- and post-surveys of NCSU undergraduates; communicate activities through CFW COP, professional website and social media.Summer 2016Complete data analysis for all surveys (teachers, high school students, and undergraduates) with undergraduate assistance; begin drafting manuscripts; begin translating findings into extension materials, search for communication outlets (e.g., journals, conferences, meetings); analyze CFW COP reach through Google analyticsFall 2016In addition to the identical objectives for Fall 2015, communicate with year-one control group of high school agriculture teachers to engage in SFCC training; begin communication of year one treatment-control results as available (submit manuscripts, attend conferences, write popular press articles, etc.)Spring 2017In addition to the identical objectives for Spring 2015, continue communication efforts of year one results.Summer 2017Data analysis of year two results, analysis of extension reach through Google analytics, draft final reports and other communication documents, begin communication of time-series results and plan for additional communication efforts beyond projectData analysis. I will use multiple regression analysis. Among high school students, I will predict changes in climate change knowledge and risk perception as a function of treatment group membership, pretest scores (to control for a ceiling effect), worldview and other variables related to student learning such as gender, ethnicity, age, teacher training and experience levels, and socio-economic status. Since it is possible that students in the same classroom will have responses that are correlated, I will include classroom as a random effect throughout regression analyses. Similarly, I will test for impacts of SFCC training and implementation among high school teachers by predicting changes in climate change knowledge and risk perception and self-efficacy in teaching climate change as a function of pretest scores and demographics (e.g., worldview, age, training level and experience, gender, ethnicity). During year two, I will complete similar analyses, but instead of testing for treatment effect versus a control, I will examine the treatment effect over time. During both years one and two, I will measure the impact of the service-learning experience among undergraduates by changes in relevant dependent as a function of treatment group membership and demographic factors. Evaluation. I will use various indicators to evaluate fulfillment of project milestones and contribution to the overall project goal of building climate change knowledge and risk perception among future agricultural and natural resource professionals through education. Success in training high school teachers will be measured by training participation rates, both teacher and student knowledge gains, increases in climate change risk perception, and increased self-efficacy in teaching climate change. Success in the service-learning component will be measured through feedback from instructors and teaching assistants at the conclusion of each fall semester, online group journals and written critical reflections, student course evaluations, elevated climate change knowledge and risk perception among students, increased self-efficacy in teaching climate change among pre-service agriculture teachers and increased likelihood natural resource students will engage in education and extension activities in their future careers. Indicators of other extension related goals will include the dissemination of at least 3 updates for the project blog housed on my professional website and the CFW COP each semester, and views, downloads, and COP interaction (tracked by Google analytics).

Progress 01/01/16 to 12/31/17

Outputs
Target Audience:There are several targe audiences for this project: 1) High school agriculture teachers. This project included a training for 38 high school teachers who teach classes including agricultural applications, horticulture, natural resources, and animal science. In addition, we surveyd 55 agriculture teachers in preparation for the training (93 teachers total). 2) High school agriculture student: We surveyed 950 students in February 2016. We also reached over 1,000 students through professional development with teachers. 3) Undergraduate students: We worked intensively with 6 undergraduate students to conduct the survey in February 2016 as part of a class service-learning project. We also reached an addition 25 undergraduate students through presentations of results. Changes/Problems:There were two major changes to this project: 1) Because we recieved funding halfway through the school year, we decided to hold the teacher professional development session in August 2016 to better fit with teachers' schedules. Because of this change, we were able to conduct a survey of high school agriculture teachers and students focused on strategic framing techniques. We surveyed 50 teachers and 950 students. Results from this study were presented at conferences and are in review for publication, including undergraudate co-authors. 2) The PD accepted a faculty position that started August 15, 2016, so the project ended on this date. We trained all the teachers engaged with the project in early August and have been continuing the study with institutional support from NC State University. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?We trained 38 high school agriculture teachers in Project Learning Tree'sSoutheastern Forests and Climate Changecurriculum. In addition, we trained 6 undergraduate students in social science research methods, including survey design, data collection and analysis, and results communicatino. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?We have dissiminated results from the February 2016 survey at the Environmental Educators of North Carolina and North American Association of Environmental Education conferences and a publication is in review inEnvironmental Education Research. As results of the full study are available, we plan to disseminate them through professional conferences in the environmental education and agriculture education communities as well as through the CFW COP, pending funding availability. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? This project ended earlier than expected because the PD accepted a faculty position August 15, 2016. However, we made siginificant progress on many of thes goald listed above. With respect to education-related goals, we did make progress in fostering a partnership between the natural resources education and agricultural education communities. We engaged 6 undergraduate students in a robust service-learning project in which we surveyed 50 agriculture teachers and 950 agriculture students. This survey focused on investigating strategic frames that resonnated best with agriculture communities. Undergraduates obtained considerable experience in social science research methods, and three of them are included on the publication resulting from this study. Students engaged with this project reported a greater appreciation for education and outreach activities as future natural resource professionals as a result of this project. We will not be continuing the service-learning component from this project because of lack of funding. In early August 2016, wetrained 38 high school agriculture teachers in the PLTSFCCmodule. We have adminstered pretests with teachers and students but will not be able to report on changes in self-efficacy in teaching climate change or increasing climate change knowledge until we collecte post-test data. We are continuing this study with institutional support from NC State University. Related to extension goals,we did use survey data from the Feb 2016 suvey to successfully recruit 38 teachers to anSFCCworkshop, and presented findings at both the Environmental Educators of North Carolina and North American Association of Environmental education conferences. We plan to publish other project activities in scholarly journals. We will explore dissemination through the CFW COP, however, this effort may be funding dependent. Progress onresearch goalsis ongoing with institutional support from NC State University. As stated above, we have collected pre-test data from agriculture students and teachers, however we will not be able to address reseasrch questions related to teacher or student outcomes until we complete post-test data collection. We will not be researching the effect of the service-learning project as we will not be able to complete it without funding.

Publications

  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Under Review Year Published: 2017 Citation: Stevenson, K.T., King, T., Selm, K., Carter, D., Peterson, M.N., Monroe, M.M., Framing Climate Change Communication to Prompt Individual and Collective Action Among Adolescents from Agriculture Communities. In review in Environmental Education Research
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2016 Citation: Stevenson, K.T., Peterson, M.N., Monroe, M.C. (2016, September). Framing climate change to promote action among agriculture students. 25th Annual Environmental Educators of North Carolina Conference, Black Mountain, NC.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2016 Citation: Stevenson, K.T., Peterson, M.N., Monroe, M.C. (2016, November). Framing climate change to promote action among agriculture students. Poster at the Showcase of NC State Women Facultys Research, Creativity & Scholarship, Raleigh, NC.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2016 Citation: 3. Stevenson, K.T., Peterson, M.N., Monroe, M.C. (2016, October). Framing climate change to promote action among agriculture students. Poster at the 14th Annual North American Association for Environmental Education Research Symposium. Madison, WI.