You are here

Climate Change Workshop For Teachers Coming To Apostle Islands National Lakeshore Next Month

Share

Teachers will travel to Stockton Island to learn about climate change impacts in the Apostle Islands as part of the "Changing Climate - Changing Culture" teacher institute scheduled for July 15-18. NPS photo.

Apostle Islands National Lakeshore will be participating in the 2013 Parks Climate Challenge program using national parks as classrooms to educate students about climate change, thanks to funding provided by the National Park Foundation.

The ability to learn about this important issue through a hands-on, science-based field curriculum, has proven a positive model through which to reach students.

The Apostle Islands National Lakeshore’s Changing Climate, Changing Culture teacher institute is scheduled for July 15-18. This professional development program is based at the Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center in Ashland, Wisconsin, with field experiences in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest; Apostle Islands, and neighboring tribal communities. Program information and registration materials are posted at this site.

The Changing Climate-Changing Culture Institute provides what’s missing in most climate change training and teaching -- the integration of climate change science with place-based evidence of how it is affecting both the environment and people. Participants discover how climate change is affecting cultural traditions of the Lake Superior Ojibwe people through Native perspectives. They will learn how to apply the latest climate research, from sources like the Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts, to determine if culture and science agree that climate change is affecting all people and cultures.

“This Institute provides teachers with the training and tools to create hands-on service projects and dynamic lessons for their students to address climate change while incorporating a national park experience either within or outside the boundaries of a national park," said Neil Howk, assistant chief of interpretation and education at the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.

Teachers will also lead their students on field trips to parks they are studying to deepen their understanding of climate change and their connection to the national parks. Service learning projects and lesson plans developed by the Institute participants are shared through the Parks Climate Challenge website so teachers everywhere can replicate the learning strategies.

Besides outstanding experiential professional development from nationally recognized instructors, teachers can receive a $400 stipend, credit, and transportation funds to bring their class to a national park for climate change field experiences. Applications to participate in the institute are due June 21st.

For more information about the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore “Changing Climate, Changing Culture” Teacher Institute contact Cathy Techtmann, UW-Extension Environmental Outreach State Specialist at 715.561.2695 or visit this site.

Comments

but one cannot choose to believe whether or not the earth is getting warmer.

Over what time frame? Yes there have been periods of warming and periods of cooling and periods like recently of no change. Scientific Method depends on repeatable results. The fact that CO2 has continued to rise but temperatures haven't breaks the "repeatable results" chain. (I noticed no one tried to address that issue) The fact that CO2 based models predicting temperature rises have been embarrassingly wrong further undermines the "established science" position.

Lee - I admire your willingness to admit there are competing arguments. Unfortunately, after seeing the core presentation of the featured presenting organization, I don't have your faith that both sides will be fairly represented at this workshop.


well balanced presentation

That's probably the key point here, Lee. Just about every stance in science (as in any discipline) has its dissenting voices, but in any pedagogical situation, how much time is devoted to an elaboration of these dissenting voices in order to give a "well-balanced presentation"? Should that time reflect the proportion of consensus/dissensus within the scientific community? As far as opponents to anthropogenic climate change, they would seem to warrant about as much attention as acquatic ape theorists would in a presention on the theory of evolution.


As far as opponents to anthropogenic climate change, they would seem to warrant about as much attention as acquatic ape theorists would in a presention on the theory of evolution.

So Justin, perhaps you would like to explain the lack of warming despite ever increasing CO2 emmissions. Remember, science isn't determined by "consensus" (especially manufactured consensus) it is determined by science.


So Justin, perhaps you would like to explain the lack of warming despite ever increasing CO2 emmissions.

(Where are you getting your science? Surely not from rightwing political sources?) You seem to be confusing temperature with heat. The pop culture myth you seem to be invoking has been thoroughly debunked. See http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998-intermediate.htm and http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling-january-2007-to-january-2008-intermediate.htm and its links to the peer-reviewed science.

Remember, science isn't determined by "consensus" (especially manufactured consensus) it is determined by science.

Not sure I need the reminder. There is 97% agreement among scientists on anthropogenic climate change. This percentage comes from a survey of the number of articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals from 1991 to 2011. See http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article

Are you suggesting that 97% of scientists and the scores of professional and national organizations Kurt linked to have "manufactured" (i.e. fabricated their science) in order to reach a consensus on climate change? And where is the list of professional and national scientific organizations that have issued a position statement against anthropogenic climate change?


The pop culture myth

I didn't realize the NYTs was into pop culture myths.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/science/earth/what-to-make-of-a-climat...

Re the studies. I have reviewed the University of Illinois study and its conclusions were clearly manufactured (as exposed above). I haven't researched all the others but I suspect they have similar flaws, i.e. leading questions, selective sampling, false extrapoloations etc. The fact the Illinois researches had to go to such lenghts to manufacture the data shows how wrong the 97% number must be. Kind of like the "hide the decline".

As to studies/groups refuting AGW, they are certainly playing against a loaded deck. If you are at all familiar with the East Anglia emails - you would know that there has been a concerted effort to suppress research and opinions discrediting AGW. Nevertheless, a long list (partially shown below) of very reputatble scientists from mainstream institutions have expressed there skeptisim.

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections
Scientists in this section have made comments that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes


Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.[16]

Scientists in this section have made comments that the observed warming is more likely attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
Scientists in this section have made comments that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
Scientists in this section have made comments that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for human society and/or the Earth's environment. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.


Teaching about Climate Change is important no matter whether your part of the 97% or 3% on the cause. The only constant on earth is change. Our Earth has gone through many climate changes, and teaching the young to consider how to best deal with the changes is important no matter if it is caused by us or mother nature. You can point fingers at the cause but how to deal with the results of rising oceans, changing weather patterns, moving communities affected, etc..may be important. Just my thoughts.


David,

I agree. If the workshop is how to cope with change, no matter the cause, I have no problem with it. Unfortunately, the evidence suggests it is one of the typical, one-sided presentations that blames change on humans and encourages government intervention.


EC, again, I disagree with your interpretation of the ppt. It casts no "blame," though it does, in a draft footnote, point to GHG levels produced by different parks in the system. And unless there's another hidden footnote I haven't seen, it doesn't encourage "government intervention" outside of leading by example. What's wrong with government agencies trying to reduce their GHG footprint?


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.