UCL - Teaching climate change and sustainability

10 2.1 The questionnaire The questionnaire gathered teachers’ views on climate change and sustainability, their experience of incorporating climate change and sustainability in their teaching, and their related professional development experience. The research was conducted with approval from the UCL Research Ethics Committee (REC 1627), and data were managed in accordance with the UK GDPR and DPA 2018. The questionnaire design and content were informed by existing research (Howard-Jones et al., 2021; Jie Li et al., 2021; Teacher Tapp, 2019; UK Government, 2018). A variety of question types were used to facilitate engagement throughout the questionnaire and to maximise insight. The question types encompassed selecting options, selecting extents of agreement or disagreement for various statements, selecting frequencies of applying various aspects of teaching, and open text fields for sharing views and experiences. The questionnaire was accessed using the Qualtrics online platform. Responses were sought from teachers in England working across all subject areas and levels of schooling, between October and December 2022. Participants were recruited through a range of networks, social media channels and distribution lists, including the IOE, subject associations, and the DfE. Incentives were offered in the form of two randomly drawn cash prizes (£100 each) that could be used to purchase climate change and sustainability teaching resources. Efforts were made to gather responses from teachers with varied experiences of climate change and sustainability education; nevertheless, it is more likely that those who are already engaged in teaching related to climate change and sustainability responded to the survey and so the results should be construed as representative of the sample, rather than representative of teachers in England as a whole. 2.2 Data analysis This report shares findings from the first phase of analysis which focused on the quantitative aspects of the questionnaire responses. The analysis quantified overall responses and explored similarities or differences in views and experiences of those teaching or not teaching subjects and levels; for example, views from those currently teaching geography were compared to views from those not teaching geography, and views from those currently teaching at secondary level were compared to views from those not teaching at secondary level. For questions that sought responses across Likert scales, analysis involved considering extents (including via 1-5 scales where 1 reflected ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 reflected ‘strongly agree’) and considering proportions (including via percentages of those selecting ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ and percentages of those selecting ‘often’ or ‘very often’). The analysis explored differences in responses through cross-tabulations, and differences in averages through independent-samples tests (without assuming equal variances across the groups of respondents being considered). Magnitudes of difference were quantified through Cohen’s D values, which are often interpreted as values below 0.20 reflecting minimal differences, values from 0.20 to 0.50 reflecting small differences, values from 0.50 to 0.80 reflecting moderate differences, and values above 0.80 reflecting large differences (Cohen, 1988). Statistical significance was shown through p values, which broadly convey the extent of statistical uncertainty. The standard threshold for ‘statistical significance’ is a p value below 0.05. For the most part, statistically significant results have been included in this report. 2. Methods