International Research in Geographical and

Environmental Education

ISSN: 1038-2046 (Print) 1747-7611 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rgee20

Singapore students' misconceptions of climate

change

Chew-Hung Chang & Liberty Pascua

To cite this article: Chew-Hung Chang & Liberty Pascua (2016) Singapore students'
misconceptions of climate change, International Research in Geographical and Environmental
Education, 25:1, 84-96, DOI: 10.1080/10382046.2015.1106206

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2015.1106206

Published online: 16 Nov 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 90

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rgee20

Download by: [RMIT University Library] Date: 15 March 2016, At: 09:38
 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 2016
Vol. 25, No. 1, 84 96, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2015.1106206

Singapore students’ misconceptions of climate change

Chew-Hung Chang* and Liberty Pascua

Graduate Studies and Professional Learning, National Institute of Education, Nanyang

Technological University, Singapore

Climate change is an important theme in the investigation of human environment

interactions in geographic education. This study explored the nature of students’
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

understanding of concepts and processes related to climate change. Through semi-

structured interviews, data was collected from 27 Secondary 3 (Grade 9) students
from Singapore. The data was subjected to thematic analysis using Chi and Roscoe’s
conceptual change framework. The results showed that the students’ base knowledge
of climate change is composed of incomplete and incorrect elements built within
coherent and structurally sound mental models. Due to the consistency of the models
in expanding the logic, albeit erroneous, of explaining the climate change conundrum,
it is posited that students are unaware of mistakes inherent in their judgements.
Transformation of these mental models through multiple and deliberate refutations
should be foremost in a geography teacher’s pedagogical approach.
Keywords: climate change; misconceptions; mental models; Singapore; Geography
education

Introduction
Mental models are physical/spatial and causal/mechanical conceptual structures that are
referred to for processes simulation and results prediction (Brewer, 2008). While indis-
putably functional, mental models could impair learning if built with incorrect or incom-
plete materials, or when ideas within the structure are connected through anomalous
linkages (Chi, 2008).
This paper investigates how concepts in climate change beliefs are organised in men-
tal models, which are not representative of the established geo-science knowledge of the
phenomenon. Climate change is an important theme in the investigation of human
environment interactions in geographic education with emphasis typically centred on
building core understanding of the science and processes involved with the weather and
climate (Dalelo, 2011). In addition to formal instruction, the topic also enjoys recurrent
media coverage so that awareness of the topic is high among learners (Ambusaidi, Boyes,
Stanisstreet, & Taylor, 2012). Exposure to the issue has indeed shaped the worldview of
children, usually of a bleak future characterised by a superheated planet (Jonsson, Sarri,
€
& Alerby, 2012; Tan, 2013) which, to some poses imminent catastrophic effects (Ozdem,
€ urk, S€
Dal, Ozt€ onmez, & Alper, 2014). It is a fact, however, that awareness does not
always indicate accurate understanding. Indeed, there is no dearth in research document-
ing various misconceptions held by students and the public about climate change. Among
these is the confusion over the process of global warming, particularly the manner in
which the heat is trapped (Lambert, Lindgren, & Bleicher, 2012). There is also the errone-
ous perception of a coupling between climate change with other environmental issues

*Corresponding author. Email: chewhung.chang@nie.edu.sg

Ó 2015 Taylor & Francis

 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 85

such as pollution (Boon, 2010), acid rain formation, smog (Pruneau et al., 2001) and
Ozone depletion (Osterlind, 2005).
Such miscomprehensions reflect what Chi and Roscoe (2002) denote as na€ıve
knowledge. Na€ıve knowledge is either a preconception or a misconception. While a
preconception can be easily corrected through instruction, a misconception is extremely
resilient and is made up of robust properties that are incorrect, incoherent or incom-
plete. With its roots founded on the constructivist perspective, the Conceptual Change
Framework as expounded by Chi and Roscoe (2002) emphasises that na€ıve conceptions
in the form of misconceptions must be identified for a targeted approach at conceptual
repair. Specifically, it posits that gaps in conceptual understanding are detected through
investigating the three interrelated dimensions of coherence, correctness and complete-
ness. Anchored on these three dimensions, this paper seeks to determine the features of
misconceptions that persist despite instruction (Chi, 2008) and how these features are
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

assembled in mental models (Brewer, 2008). A flawed mental model is difficult to

untangle and errors, once deeply embedded, have the tendency to multiply and perpetu-
ate (Liarakou, Athanasiadis, & Gavrilakis, 2011). It is the intention of this paper to
add to the growing scholarship on climate change education centred on geographic
instruction.

Method
This article is part of a research project aimed at establishing baseline data on how cli-
mate change is taught and learned in Singapore’s schools. Geography is a mandatory sub-
ject in secondary level schooling in the city-state. With a curriculum designed to develop
core understanding of the environment, climate change occupies a significant amount of
curriculum time in both Secondary 2 and 3 (Grades 8 and 9 equivalent) (Chang, 2012).
Twenty-seven students, all from Secondary 3 and have finished the lesson on climate
change in lower and upper secondary Geography, were participants to the research. The
informants were between the ages of 14 and 15, of mixed genders and ethnic
backgrounds.
The students initially took part in a performance task aimed at diagnosing students’
baseline understanding of the phenomenon. Results from said test revealed significant
deficiencies in constructed knowledge but more importantly, several inconsistencies were
discovered on how the students constructed their argument (Chang & Pascua, 2014). This
prompted the researchers to explore the assumption that there are multiple dimensions to
the miscomprehension of students.
Semi-structured interview was facilitative in probing the reasons for the students’
answers (Newby, 2010) and in capturing the full range of responses, both the
expected and the unforeseen (Check & Schutt, 2012). There were midcourse changes
to the data-gathering plan such as shifting to paired interviews to adjust to the partic-
ipants’ schedules. The paired interviews proved to be a serendipitous move such that
the students appeared to be more conversational, relaxed and candid compared to
those who participated in the one-on-one interviews. Taking heed from Newby
(2010), collective interviews actually add richness to the data as the interaction
between interviewees diminishes the formality of the activity and balancing power
relations in the process. Instead of direct responses to the question, the conversation
becomes more of a chat, thus, allowing more room for the issue to be explored with
more depth.
 86 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua

Highlighted in this paper were the responses to questions on the causes of climate
change. The key questions asked were the following:

(1) How does climate change happen?

(2) What are the natural causes of climate change?
(3) What are human activities that exacerbate the climate change process?
(4) What is the enhanced greenhouse effect?

As the intention was to gather context-specific answers organic to the Singapore setting, a
conscious decision was made to not ask direct questions that would lead students to surface
alternative conceptions such as those already identified in the literature. Nonetheless, even
with the absence of prompts, the conversations naturally segued to narratives and justifica-
tions of how “the hole in the sky”, for example, leads to global warming. With such accounts,
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

the enquiry technique shifted suitably from asking general to specific questions to allow the
informants to articulate their conceptual understanding of the topic. This confirmed that a
good number of misconceptions are comprehensive regardless of research location.
Coding of responses followed a procedure that was both structured and iterative (Bab-
bie, 2010). Open coding involved segmenting the responses into themes, after which the
thematic patterns were subjected to template analysis vis-a-vis the research dimensions.
Template analysis is especially useful when there are pre-determined concepts that serve
as codes (Newby, 2010). Accordingly, a coherent model was judged by its consistency in
linking ideas systematically while a complete model was assessed by whether the major-
ity of the key elements are present or missing. Finally, a correct model was marked by
whether the elements that comprise the structure are (in)accurate. A model was consid-
ered flawed if any of these distinctions was not met. Table 1 summarises the coding
dimensions and corresponding indicators.
The three dimensions were first individually teased out in the discussion of results as
supported by frequency tables (N D 27) and excerpts from the interviews. Original illus-
trations of mental models were drawn based on the patterns documented and these were
integrated in the discussion.

Results
Completeness
The missing elements in students’ reasoning were indicative of information deficit. Unfamil-
iarity with relevant terminologies and processes were detected in their responses (Table 2).

Natural causes of climate change

Students’ understanding of the causes of climate change was limited to the belief that
recorded changes are solely due to anthropogenic reasons. While human influences often
are highlighted in the prevalent rhetoric on climate change, it is also true that the climate

Table 1. Dimensions and indicators.

Dimension Indicator

Incompleteness Missing elements

Incorrectness Confounding ideas
Incoherence Disjointed links
 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 87

Table 2. Missing elements.

Frequencies

Natural causes of climate change 22

Natural vs. enhanced greenhouse effect 24
Fossil fuel use as anthropogenic cause 24
Farming as anthropogenic cause 27
Deforestation and carbon oxidation 27
Water vapour as a greenhouse gas 26
The positive feedback loop 26

goes through natural shifts and, to a degree, such irregularities are aided by processes that
are not within the control of humans such as volcanic eruptions and solar activity. Of the
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

27 students, only one confirmed that climate change is partly due to natural causes. The
student referred to the sun as having a key role in the heating process albeit unable to fully
defend his response. Four students replied that there may be natural causes but also imme-
diately argued that humans should be regarded as the sole culprits. The rest maintained
that human activities are the sole reason to global climatic changes. An excerpt from the
interviews illustrates this point.

S2: It’s not natural. Because… erm… humans, they cut down trees. And then if they cut
down trees, erm, usually trees are the only one(s) to absorb carbon dioxide. So if they cut
down trees, and humans usually takes in oxygen…so if they release more carbon dioxide, it
will increase greenhouse effect as well.

Natural vs. enhanced greenhouse effect

There was no clear delineation between the natural and the enhanced greenhouse effect in
students’ explanations. When asked to differentiate the natural and the enhanced green-
house effect, three students correctly described the natural greenhouse effect as a vital
element for life to be possible on earth. However, the other informants were not able to
delineate the two, at times referring to natural greenhouse effect as an essential and also
detrimental process to the planet. The informants stalled in responding when asked to
elaborate why a seemingly “good” process is also a “bad” process. It was apparent that
they did not have the vocabulary such as the “enhancement” of the greenhouse effect to
refer to their conceptual notion of why there is increased warming.

Society’s carbon footprint

There are three vital fundamentals in building a basic and complete explanation of the
enhanced greenhouse effect as caused by anthropogenic factors. Figure 1 illustrates these.
Of the three elements, the students were most familiar with gases. Responses almost
always included a name or a type of gas, or a reference to a group of gases. Deforestation
was mainly understood for the role of trees as absorbers of carbon dioxide, thus implicitly
referring to forests as carbon sinks. There was no indication that carbon oxidation was
known as a negative consequence of deforestation. Farming as an anthropogenic factor
was never mentioned. Although there was common awareness that transportation and
electricity use were related to climate change, explanations supplied were not linked to
fossil fuel use and carbon emissions. These results denoted that the informants saw
humans as culprits to climate change although their understanding of how it was so was
not fully developed.
 88 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua

Figure 1. Anthropogenic climate change.

Water vapour as a greenhouse gas

Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

Carbon dioxide was the most popular among the gases identified, followed by chloro-
fluorocarbons (CFCs), methane and nitrous oxide. Water vapour, a key greenhouse gas,
was missing from the students’ conceptual understanding, while carbon monoxide was
repeatedly cited as both a greenhouse gas and a pollutant. This interview vignette is an
illustration.

S: The greenhouse gases are CFCs, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide,
methane.
I: What about water vapour. Is it a greenhouse gas?
S: Uhh. No. No, it is not.

The positive feedback loop

The positive feedback loop refers to the process wherein the enhancement of the green-
house effect results in the melting of permafrost. This event causes the exposure of fossil
deposits, which then leads to the release of enormous amounts of carbon dioxide and
methane into the atmosphere. This exponential addition of greenhouse gases would pro-
mote an even more favourable environment for atmospheric temperature to rise, leading
to the melting of more land ice. Figure 2 shows an extended illustration incorporating the
positive feedback loop.

Figure 2. Positive feedback loop.

 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 89

One student successfully described the process and even spelled out the term “albedo
effect”. The rest, however, declared that they did not have knowledge about the process.
A clear comprehension of the mechanics of the loop’s operation would allow a learner to
effectively associate how the process in Figure 1 is but a part of a continuous, more com-
plex, cycle with far-reaching effects.

Correctness
A number of superfluous elements comprised the students’ repertoire of concepts, perhaps
a result of incompleteness of understanding, which have the capacity of substituting and/
or replacing correct concepts (Table 3).
The air-conditioner was the most popular household fixture perceived to contribute
most to climate change. It is important to distinguish here that the air-conditioner was sin-
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

gled out because it is believed to emit CFCs that destroy the ozone layer. The informants
repeatedly explained that people should use less of the device to curb the amount of
CFCs in the atmosphere, thereby allowing global temperature to revert to pre-climate
change level. In addition to the air-conditioner, students also stated that the use of aero-
sols and Styrofoam products significantly alter the Earth’s climate.
In addition, the use of transportation vehicles as anthropogenic source of carbon also
was a popular answer. The justifications given were centred on the rationale that cars give
off carbon monoxide. While it is true that carbon monoxide is a greenhouse gas,
its impact to and concentration in the atmosphere is significantly less than that of
major greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, water vapour and methane. It is then
taken that this idea was mainly linked to carbon monoxide as an air pollutant than as a
greenhouse gas.

The gases
Students’ familiarity with the compounds was almost always put next to the idea that the
gases cause harm to the atmosphere. Such was evident in terms such as “unwanted”,
“toxic”, “waste” and “poisonous”. The gases were also referred to as harmful
“emissions”, “pollutants”, “smoke”, “fumes”, “chemicals”, “exhausts” and elements that
destroy something, usually in reference to the atmosphere or the ozone layer or both.
Further, the gases as air pollutants were seen to be synonymous to or closely associated
with greenhouse gases. It followed that pollutants were also deemed responsible for
increased warming on Earth. Some indicated that pollutants destroy the ozone layer and
cause acid rain.

Table 3. Confounding ideas.

Frequencies

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are major greenhouse gases 24

Carbon monoxide is a major greenhouse gas 14
Greenhouse gases are generally regarded as pollutants and are harmful and toxic. 25
The intensification of the heating process is caused by ultraviolet rays 11
Climate change is linked with ozone depletion 27
Climate change is linked with tectonic activities (tsunami, earthquakes) 15
Others (acid rain, radioactivity, chemical evaporation, heat emission from 8
factories/incineration)
 90 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua

The intensification of the heating process

Reinfried, Aeschbacher, and Rottermann (2012) maintain that radiation conversion on the
Earth’s surface and the selective absorption of thermal radiation by carbon dioxide, the
two key processes in climate change, are usually neglected in textbooks. It was earlier
indicated that students were least familiar with the process of heat trapping as a result of
the enhanced greenhouse effect. The term retention is used to better capture the students’
conceptual understanding of the heating process. In fact, global warming was not always
comprehended as a result of increased greenhouse gas activities.
Consistent with the literature(Andersson & Wallin, 2000; Lambert et al., 2012;
Shepardson, Choi, Niyogi, & Charusombat, 2011), the sun is believed to be the direct
source of heat that is kept on Earth and solar radiation in the form of ultraviolet (UV)
rays were perceived as the primary agent for global warming. Infrared radiation was
seldom cited and in the occasion that it was so, it was supposed to emanate directly from
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

the sun and take the characteristics of a UV ray. The knowledge of ground-emitted heat
was not detected in the responses. Interestingly, some indicated that factories, nuclear
power plants, industrial machineries and incineration produce the heat that is retained.

S: Because of factories, there is more heat.

I: Why is that so?
S: They emit hot gases. When they process materials, they use fire. So this heat gets trapped.

The ozone
Interchangeably referred to as hole, layer and a depleted matter, the ozone was the most
prominent confounding concept in students’ conceptual maps. The destruction of the
ozone was almost always associated with global warming and attributed to the following
factors: greenhouse gases, CFCs, chemicals, pollutants and extreme heat.
The ozone is understood as a layer of protection over the Earth that shields the planet
from the sun’s heat through reflecting solar rays back into space. It then follows that
when ozone gas is depleted this protective layer is assumed to also lose its capacity to bar
the heat. The earth’s climate and the ozone layer were perceived as intricately linked so
that a change in the structure of the ozone layer was comprehended as a change in the
Earth’s climate as well.

Relatedness to other issues

Interestingly, climate change is perceived as coupled with other environmental issues
such as tectonic activities, acid rain, radioactivity and pollution. For instance, 15 students
perceived climate change to cause volcanic eruptions and tsunamis. While most were
unable to justify their answers, three students opined that increased precipitation would
create an overabundance of ocean water, which could then trigger a tsunami. Two stu-
dents stated that increased temperature could affect the Earth’s crust which then could
start volcanic activities. In addition, climate change is seen as a cause of acid rain due to
increased precipitation.

Coherence
The students’ idea structures when examined holistically were mostly coherent. The rea-
soning patterns have the ability to expand the logic of their arguments, albeit erroneous,
 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 91

of explaining the climate change conundrum. We take as an example the belief that the
ozone layer shields the earth from the sun’s rays. With the concept of a “layer” promi-
nently poised as a key element in an idea structure, all other related concepts were bent to
support this belief. Thus, depletion of gases in the layer causes global warming. CFCs
produced by humans destroy the layer, making humans gravely responsible for global
warming. A hole in the layer allows the penetration of intense direct heat from the sun,
which causes global warming and skin cancer. Indeed, such pattern of reasoning was the
norm rather than an anomaly in the responses.

S1: The Ozone layer prevents the heat rays from the sun from actually reaching Earth. So,
then, if more heat comes in, we use more aircon, they produce more electricity, more, erm,
chemicals and the harmful products go back to into the sky, depleting the Ozone layer, and
then it’s just a cycle that will keep going on until, everybody dies out. You know.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

However, there were also instances when the students fused together certain concepts
rather unsuccessfully.
In attempts to discover alternative explanations, probing questions were asked about the
role of greenhouse gases in climate change. The answers often were a combination of con-
fused conceptual linking between greenhouse gases and the ozone layer. Greenhouse gases
were known to “blanket the earth” while the ozone was dubbed the “earth’s protection”.
Both the ozone and greenhouse gases were perceived to trap heat. Both were also seen as
matter that is destroyed. The confusion between the two was best captured by a student’s
explanation of a “greenhouse layer”, an element that is formed by greenhouse gases and
has both the capacity to trap heat and reflect heat away. The ozone is believed to shield the
Earth from the sun’s rays, while also blocking the heat from the Earth to escape (Table 4).
Such confusions are depicted in this conversation with two male students:

S1: I really don’t know how to explain why these gases can trap heat. I think it’s because of
the density of the gases that makes the Ozone a little bit denser, then the heat have problem
escaping.
I: So, what’s the role of the Ozone layer?
S1: Erm, it’s to rebound some of the ultra… infrared ray(s) from the sun.
I: Just to clarify, where does the heat come from?
S2: Sun.
I: The sun.
S1: Some came from the sun and some came from industries, like the processors that generate
heat and it is released to the atmosphere and it is trapped by the gases.
I: So you’re saying it’s coming from the sun. And you’re saying it’s coming from the indus-
tries also. You said something about the heat that’s supposed to escape?
S1: Yeah, correct.
S2: And then it becomes contained, yeah, by the Ozone layer.
S1: Because of the Ozone layer.
I: What does the Ozone layer do?
S2: Protects the Earth from UV rays? Yeah, from the sun.

Table 4. Disjointed links.

Frequencies

The functions of the ozone layer and greenhouse gases 5

The dual role of the ozone as “blocker” 3
 92 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua

Mental models
The conceptual arrangement of ideas that emerged did not follow a one-way, one-dimen-
sional line of reasoning. The mental models were complex systems, fusions of thoughts
both correct and erroneous, with key elements absent or replaced and oftentimes assem-
bled through an intelligible, organised idea structure.

Heat is trapped
The factor of ground-emitted heat was missing from the models. This was replaced by the
sun and/or man-made sources as the origin of heat. Confounding ideas such as pollutants
(Figure 3) and the ozone layer (Figure 4) as elements that trap heat further complicated
the model.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

“Something” destroys the ozone layer

The depletion of the ozone as a confounding idea conveniently replaced heat trapping in
students’ conceptual structure. While it was indicated that some students believed that the
ozone traps heat, most of those interviewed expressed that the ozone reflects heat away

Figure 3. Gases trap heat.

Figure 4. A layer traps heat.

 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 93
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

Figure 5. Gases destroy the ozone layer.

Figure 6. Heat destroys the ozone layer.

from the Earth. Indeed, the intensification of the heating process was attributed to the
increase in the sun’s capacity to bombard the Earth with more damaging rays as the
ozone’s blanket of protection is destroyed by CFCs mostly, and also by other elements
such as greenhouse gases, pollutants and heat from man-made sources. Notice
that ground-emitted heat was also missing in the structural composition of the models
(Figures 5 and 6).

Hybrid model
This model shows how greenhouse gases and the ozone layer are thought to interact with
each other. As gases trap heat from the sun, this stored heat causes the depletion of the
ozone. Dysfunctional ozone then allows more heat to penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere,
thus, further intensifying the heat-trapping process (Figure 7).
 94 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

Figure 7. Heat trapped by greenhouse gases destroys the ozone layer.

Discussion and conclusion

Chi and Roscoe’s (2002) distinction of mental models provided an operable scheme to
analyse students’ conceptual understanding of climate change. The errors in association
confirmed Chi’s (2008) claim of a flawed mental model that is largely built with coherent
but incorrect and incomplete factors. Even though they have been exposed to classroom
discussions on the topic, the students still have major gaps in their understanding. A chief
concern is the prevalence of confounding ideas, elements injected into their arguments
that have the capacity to substitute correct concepts. Due to the coherence of the mental
models in expanding the logic, albeit erroneous, of solving the climate change conun-
drum, it is posited that the students were likely unaware of the mistakes inherent in their
arguments. Similarities with Shepardson, Choi, Niyogi, and Charusombat (2012), She-
pardson, Niyogi, Choi, and Charusombat (2009) and Andersson and Wallin’s (2000) find-
ings show that the misconceptions are widespread. Among these were the ozone-related
models, the nature and behaviour of greenhouse gases, and the source and type of heat
that is retained. As Andersson and Wallin (2000) also have observed, the ozone-related
models serve as a convenient and easy route to explain the warming process: as “the bar-
rier thins out, more radiation can come through” (p.1108).
One unique contribution of this study is its identification of the perceived role of heat
in the warming process. While the literature elaborated on students’ perception of indus-
trial activities as perpetrators of climate change, the heat generated from these facilities
and its purported role in actual atmospheric temperature increase was not explored. In
fact, this study determined that learners perceive industrial and nuclear activities as heat
generators in addition to being greenhouse gas and pollutant emitters.
In retrospect to climate change as a key feature of human–environment interaction in
geographical inquiry, this study posits that even though the science of weather and cli-
mate are given room in the formal curriculum (Dalelo, 2011), and although there is high
and sustained awareness among learners on the topic (Ambusaidi et al., 2012), educators
in both Geography and the Sciences must be cognizant of deeply embedded errors in a
mental model as barriers to learning. They must respond through modifying their peda-
gogy to include identification and direct refutation of misconceptions. For instance, if the
 International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 95

function of the ozone is not clarified and deleted in a conceptual structure, it is likely that
new information added would only be appended to an already flawed model (Chi &
Roscoe, 2002). To correct persistent misconceptions, students must be made aware of the
flaws in their mental models through multiple revisions (Chi, 2008; Chi & Roscoe, 2002).
The need to build accurate understanding about climate change cannot be overem-
phasised. Indeed, students have been especially pessimistic of a future that they do not
€
quite understand (Jonsson et al., 2012; Ozdem, et al., 2014; Tan, 2013). As Bord,
O’Connor and Fisher (2000) reiterated, bogus knowledge prevents individuals from intel-
ligently responding to the challenges posed by climate change. This is not to claim that
correct knowledge is a stand-alone determinant for climate change responsiveness.
Indeed, climate literacy alone does not provide sufficient condition to galvanise the youn-
ger generation to take action. A belief that is constructed from their accurate, coherent
and complete understanding of the issue must also be complemented by a moral responsi-
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

bility as stewards to the environment. It is indisputable nonetheless that accurate under-

standing of the processes involved remains a key factor, if not the very driver, for moral
responsibility to take shape. This is an area where Geography education has a stake in
developing.
While the findings of this research provide meaningful insight as to the nature of cli-
mate change misconceptions held by the students, an analysis of curriculum content,
students’ receptiveness to instruction and teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical
approaches used would be valuable addition for a more holistic understanding of the sub-
ject matter. Such themes will be explored in future studies planned by the authors.

Acknowledgements
This paper refers to data from the research projects “Climate Change Education in Singapore: Per-
ceptions and Practices” (RS 1/11 CCH) funded by the Research Support for Senior Academic
Administrator (RS-SAA) Grant, National Institute of Education. The views expressed in this paper
are the authors’ and do not necessarily represent the views of NIE.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
Research Support for Senior Academic Administrator (RS-SAA) Grant, National Institute of Educa-
tion, Nanyang Technological University.

References
Ambusaidi, A., Boyes, E., Stanisstreet, M., & Taylor, N. (2012). Omani students’ views about
global warming: Beliefs about actions and willingness to act. International Research in Geo-
graphical and Environmental Education, 21, 21 39. doi:10.1080/10382046.2012.639154
Andersson, B., & Wallin, A. (2000). Students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal
consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and the problem of ozone layer depletion. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1096 1111. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:103.0.
co;2-8
Babbie, E. R. (2010). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Boon, H. J. (2010). Climate change? Who knows? A comparison of secondary students and pre-ser-
vice teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35, 104 120.
 96 C.-H. Chang and L. Pascua

Bord, R. J., O’Connor, R. E., & Fisher, A. (2000). In what sense does the public need to understand
global climate change? Public Understanding of Science, 9, 205 218. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/
9/3/301
Brewer, W. F. (2008). Na€ıve theories of observational astronomy: Review, analysis, and theoretical
implications. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change
(pp. 155 204). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chang, C.-H. (2012). The changing climate of teaching and learning school geography: The case of
Singapore. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 21,
283 295. doi:10.1080/10382046.2012.725965
Chang, C.-H., & Pascua, L. (2014). Uncovering the nexus between scientific discourse and school
geography in Singapore students’ understanding of climate change. Research in Geographic
Education, 16, 41 56.
Check, J. W., & Schutt, R. K. (2012). Research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chi, M. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation,
and categorical shift. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chi, M. T., & Roscoe, R. D. (2002). The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In M.
Downloaded by [RMIT University Library] at 09:38 15 March 2016

Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice
(pp. 3 27) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Dalelo, A. (2011). Global climate change in geography curricula for Ethiopian secondary and pre-
paratory schools. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education,
20, 227 246. doi:10.1080/10382046.2011.588505
Jonsson, G., Sarri, C., & Alerby, E. (2012). “Too hot for the reindeer” voicing Sami children’s
visions of the future. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education,
21, 95 107. doi:10.1080/10382046.2012.672668
Lambert, J. L., Lindgren, J., & Bleicher, R. (2012). Assessing elementary science methods students’
understanding about global climate change. International Journal of Science Education, 34,
1167 1187. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.633938
Liarakou, G., Athanasiadis, I., & Gavrilakis, C. (2011). What Greek secondary school students
believe about climate change? International Journal of Environmental & Science Education,
6, 79 98.
Newby, P. T. (2010). Research methods for education. New York, NY: Pearson.
Osterlind, K. (2005). Concept formation in environmental education: 14-year olds’ work on the
intensified greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone layer. International Journal of
Science Education, 27, 891 908. doi:10.1080/09500690500038264
€
Ozdem, € urk, N., S€onmez, D., & Alper, U. (2014). What is that thing called climate
Y., Dal, B., Ozt€
change? An investigation into the understanding of climate change by seventh-grade students.
International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 23, 294 313.
doi:10.1080/10382046.2014.946323
 Biosphè re, L., Gravel, H., Bourque, W., & Langis, J. (2001).
Pruneau, D., Liboiron, L., Vrain, E.,
People’s ideas about climate change: A source of inspiration for the creation of educational pro-
grams. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE), 6, 121 138.
Reinfried, S., Aeschbacher, U., & Rottermann, B. (2012). Improving students’ conceptual under-
standing of the greenhouse effect using theory-based learning materials that promote deep
learning. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 21, 155 178.
doi:10.1080/10382046.2012.672685
Shepardson, D. P., Choi, S., Niyogi, D., & Charusombat, U. (2011). Seventh grade students’ mental
models of the greenhouse effect. Environmental Education Research, 17, 1 17. doi:10.1080/
13504620903564549
Shepardson, D. P., Choi, S., Niyogi, D., & Charusombat, U. (2012). Students’ conceptions about the
greenhouse effect, global warming, and climate change. Climatic Change, 113(3 4),
1097 1097. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0472-y
Shepardson, D. P., Niyogi, D., Choi, S., & Charusombat, U. (2009). Seventh grade students’ con-
ceptions of global warming and climate change. Environmental Education Research, 15,
549 570. doi:10.1080/13504620903114592
Tan, G. C. I. (2013). Voices in Singapore: Young people visioning their futures. In M. Robertson &
S. Tani (Eds.), Young people: Cross-cultural views and futures (pp. 107 124). Victoria: Acer
Press.