Essay by Eric Worrall
Apparently its OK to step up climate education, because the kids are scared anyway, and scaring them more “engages them with positive actions”.
How should we teach climate change in schools? It starts with ‘turbo charging’ teacher education
Published: June 13, 2023 6.01am AEST
Russell Tytler Professor of science education, Deakin University
Peter Freebody Honorary Professorial Fellow School of Education, University of WollongongThe case for action on climate change no longer needs to be laid out.
…
The Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia has done a review of research on climate change education in schools around the world.
…
The emotional side of learning about climate
Teaching climate change in schools raises basic and potentially divisive questions about the purpose of education and the nature of childhood. We are supposed to teach children about their world. But what if in doing so, we scare them with facts about climate change?
We also know children are worried about climate change anyway. Many children and teenagers are stressed and anxious due to their growing awareness of climate change.
An increasing body of research is identifying approaches to teaching and learning about climate change that address students’ understanding in this complex area and engages them with positive actions.
This includes making climate change personally relevant, interacting with scientists to experience scientific practices and designing projects to address an aspect of climate change.
…
Not every kid gets “engaged” with positive actions. Some kids can’t cope with the fear, and turn to hard drugs to alleviate the psychological pain.
The following is testimony given by Dr. Alex Wodak in 2019 to a NSW Ice addiction inquiry.
…
First, the threshold step is redefining drugs as primarily a health and social issue rather than primarily a law enforcement issue. Second, drug treatment has to be expanded and improved until it reaches the same level as other health services. Third, all penalties for personal drug use and possession have to be scrapped.
Fourth, as much of the drug market as possible has to be regulated while recognising that part of the drug market is already regulated, such a methadone treatment, needle and syringe programs, medically supervised injecting centres. It will, of course, never be possible to regulate the entire drug market. We have regulated parts of the drug market before. Edible opium was taxed and regulated in Australia until 1906 and in the United States Coca-Cola contained cocaine until 1903.
Fifth, efforts to reduce the demand for powerful psychoactive drugs in Australia have had limited benefit and require a new focus. Unless and until young Australians feel optimistic about their future, demand for drugs will remain strong. Young people, understandably, want more certainty about their future prospects, including climate, education, jobs and housing affordability. Change will be slow and incremental, like all social policy reform.
As Herb Stein, as adviser to President Nixon said:
Things that cannot go on forever don’t.Drug prohibition cannot go on forever and will be replaced by libertarian paternalism. Thank you.
…
Source:
https://www.iceinquiry.nsw.gov.au//assets/scii/transcripts/Decriminalisation-round-table/Decriminalisation-Roundtable-Transcript.pdf(available on Wayback Machine)
Many of those kids who don’t end up visible destroying themselves may suffer, even if they outwardly lead a normal life, and keep their suffering private. Who knows how many of the kids subject to “turbo charged” climate education will live stunted adult lives filled with psychological pain, a lifetime of struggling with long term psychological trauma from their “turbo-charged” climate indoctrination.
What about the teachers at the coalface of this climate indoctrination push? How do they live with the guilt of seeing a child who came to their class as a happy child, turn into a drugged addicted human wreck? Perhaps they can console themselves climate education wasn’t the only factor in that child’s downfall, and for most kids climate fear was likely only one of a range of problems. But deep down some of them at least must be aware that adding to the burden of distress children experience is not helping the situation.
I doubt social engineers like Professors Tytler and Freebody care about the harm they are causing, with their push for turbo charged climate indoctrination. As far as I can tell not one mention in their article, of helping those kids who are damaged by the intensified climate indoctrination they want to inflict on Australian schoolchildren.