Skip to main content

Climate Literacy and Collaborative On-Line Landscapes: Engaging the Climate Conversation Through Drama Facilitation in Distance and e-Learning Environments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Climate Literacy and Innovations in Climate Change Education

Part of the book series: Climate Change Management ((CCM))

Abstract

The dramatist and the scientist have similar goals as they both attempt to ‘create unique, engaging and insightful texts about the human condition’ (Saldina in Youth Theatre J 14:60–71, 1999, p. 60). As the risks of devastating climate change becomes more and more apparent there is a growing understanding of the role the creative arts can play in making sense of the ecological challenges we encounter. Drama processes and performance can widely engage with sustainability issues across a number of Year levels and it’s behavioural activism appeals to its audiences to think for themselves and ‘act’. Dramatic form is premised on critical and creative thinking. As an art form it is only a complete learning activity when it engages the learner to experience the drama and ‘do’ or ‘act’. This chapter discusses the potential to introduce climate literacies into on-line learning platforms through drama curriculum processes and practices. While utilising drama in on-line learning landscapes is still largely a theoretical proposition, this chapter suggests that the dramatic form could provide a unique means of fostering climate literacies with distance learners. A focus on environmental and ecological issues in the curriculum through drama collaborative processes and practices can potentially increase the possibilities for global climate change education and promote the importance of sustainability for future generations. This chapter therefore proposes that dramatic investigations of scientific discourse may provide unique ways of developing climate literacy through alternative understandings, through adopting scientists’ amassed knowledge and transforming it into something that can be experienced and explored kinaesthetically in the representational worlds of the drama.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Hassall (2013) Salvation, Charles and McGahan (2009) The White Earth.

  2. 2.

    Many authors stress the importance of asynchronous communication, as social media technologies are not as useful for group interaction in certain contexts. See McInnerney and Roberts (2004) and Aitken and Shedletsky (2002).

References

  • Aitken, J., & Shedletsky, L. (2002). Using electronic discussion to teach communication courses. Communication Education, 51(3), 325–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boettcher, J. (2013). Ten best practices for teaching online: Quick guide for new online faculty. Designing for Learning. Accessed July 2017 from http//:www.designingforlearning.info/services/writing/ecoach/tenbest.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosse, J. (2016). Nature/revelation; Ian Potter Museum of Art, the University of Melbourne. In G. Abrahams, B. Johnson, & K. Gellaty (Eds), ART + CLIMATE = CHANGE (pp. 14–17). Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourriaud, N., Pleasance, S., Woods, F., & Copeland, M. (2002). Relational aesthetics (p. 44). Dijon: Les presses du réel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyes, E., & Stanissteet, M. (1993). The greenhouse effect: Children’s perceptions of causes, consequences and cures. International Journal of Science Education, 15(5), 531–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckland, D. (2015). Interview with CLIMARTE, June 8, 2015. www.youtube.com/watch?v=iavv8e5dph0. Accessed July 2017.

  • Burandt, S., & Barth, M. (2010). Learning settings to face climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 659–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charles, S., & McGahan, A. (2009). The white earth. Brisbane: Playlab Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clary, R., & Wandersee, J. (2012). Mandatory climate change discussions in on-line classrooms: Promoting students’ climate literacy and understanding the nature of science. Journal of College of Science Teaching, 41, 70–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca, K., & Demo, A. (2000). Imagining nature: Watkins, Yosemite, and the birth of environmentalism. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 17(3), 241–260. doi:10.1080/15295030009388395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duxbury, L. (2010). A change in the climate: New interpretations and perceptions of climate change through artistic interventions and representations. American Meteorological Society, 2, 294–299. doi:10:1175/2010WCAS1053.1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahey, S. J. (2012). Curriculum change and climate change: Inside outside pressures in higher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(5), 703–722. doi:10.1080/00220272.2012.679011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fish, W., & Wickersham, L. (2009). Best practices for on-line instructors: Reminders. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education Leadership, 10, 279–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fjuk, A., & Sorensen, E. K. (1997). Drama as a methaphor for design of situated, collaborative distributed learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 1. Accessed online April 06, 17 from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=1997&halfyear=1&article=14.

  • Fortner, R. W. (2001). Climate change in school: Where does it fit and how ready are we? Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 6(Spring), 18–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaudio, M. (2008). [Participant in] The art seminar. In R. Z. DeLue & J. Elkins (Eds.), Landscape theory (pp. 87–156). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowda, M., Fox, J., & Magelky, R. (1997). Student’s understanding of climate change: Insights for scientists and educators. Bulletin of American Meteorological Society, 78(1), 2232–2240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassall, L. (2013). Salvation (D. Baker & D. Beattie (Eds)), TEXT Journal of Literary and Creative Writing-Scriptwriting as Creative Writing Research—Special Issue Series Number 19, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (2002). Introductory biology on-line. Journal of Science Teaching, 31, 312–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, P., & Hidreth, D. (2001). Internet courses: Are they worth the effort? Journal of College Science Teaching, 2(2), 112–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz, E. N. (1999). The Essence of Chaos (p. 77). Washington: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. (2005). Seeing is believing: The role of video conferencing in distance learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, T. (2007). Beyond Bambi: Toward a dangerous ecocriticism in theatre studies. Theatre Topics, 17(2), 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInnerney, J. M., & Roberts, T. S. (2004). Online learning: Social interaction and the creation of a sense of community. Educational Technology & Society, 7(3), 73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNair-Crews, G. P. (2015). Investigating instructor perceptions of online teaching versus traditional classroom instruction (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). Accessed June 2017 from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1733219633?pq-origsite=gscholar.

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in on-line learning. A meta-analysis and review of on-line learning studies. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport/pdf.

  • Miller, A. I. (1995). Aesthetics, representation and creativity in art and science. Leonardo, 28, 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrisey, S., & Reser, J. (2007). Natural disasters, climate change and mental health considerations for rural Australians. AJRH, Australian Journal Rural Health, 15, 120–125. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1548.2007.00865.x. Accessed on April 03, 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, T. (2008). John Clare’s Dark ecology. Studies in Romanticism, 47(2), 179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, S., & Hulme, M. (2008). An iconic approach for representing climate change. Global Environmental Change, 19, 402–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace. Effective strategies for the on-line classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K., Eady, M., & Edelen-Smith, P. (2011). Creating virtual classrooms for rural and remote communities: On-line learning may be the key to enabling people in less populous areas to earn teaching degrees and other professional certificates. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 22+.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldina, J. (1999). Playwrighting with data: Ethnographic performance texts. Youth Theatre Journal, 14, 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, J. (2004). The land: Dreams and disappointments. Griffith Review, Dreams of Land, 2003–2004(Summer), 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, J. (2006). Masters of the universe: How nigh is the end. Griffith Review: Hot Air. How nigh is the end? Winter, 12, 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, S., & Wallis, M. (2004). Drama, theatre, performance: The new critical idiom. Abingdon: Routeledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Finnucane, M., Peters, E., & Mac Gregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, J. (2016). Art in a harsh climate: Pathways to a just and resilient post carbon future. In G. Abrahams, B. Johnson, & K. Gellaty (Eds.), ART + CLIMATE = CHANGE (pp. 6–13). Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitmarsh, L. (2011). Scepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions, determinants and change over time. Global Environmental Change, 21, 690–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zsohar, H., & Smith, J. (2008). Transition from the classroom to the web: Successful strategies for teaching on-line. Nursing Education Perspectives, 29, 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linda Hassall .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hassall, L. (2018). Climate Literacy and Collaborative On-Line Landscapes: Engaging the Climate Conversation Through Drama Facilitation in Distance and e-Learning Environments. In: Azeiteiro, U., Leal Filho, W., Aires, L. (eds) Climate Literacy and Innovations in Climate Change Education. Climate Change Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70199-8_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70199-8_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70198-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70199-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics