Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wp2c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T01:03:06.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who’s striking, and who’s not? Avoiding and acknowledging bias in youth climate activism research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2022

Hannah R. Feldman Open the ORCID record for Hannah R. Feldman [Opens in a new window]
Hannah R. Feldman*
Affiliation:
The Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science (CPAS), Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia Institute for Water Futures, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia 3A Institute, School of Cybernetics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: hannah.feldman@anu.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The School Strike 4 Climate is a timely opportunity for education and research sectors to support youth stories in climate change policy, and foster impactful relationships between researchers, teachers and students. But much research in this space has inherent selection biases where youth representation in research is limited by place (such as attendance at a protest), snowball sampling (often within already engaged groups) or through education channels (such as private or independent schools), ultimately leading to unrepresentative response samples. This comment explores the challenges and opportunities for equitable inclusion of teenage voices in environmental research, including some practical approaches (such as inclusion of public schools) to ensure more diverse samples are represented. Implications for how the existing body of research should be viewed is discussed, highlighting an existing lack of representation of students that do not overtly engage with climate activism or School Strikes.

Keywords

public schoolresearch methodsschool strikeschoolyouth
Type
Article
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 38 , Special Issue 1: School Strike for Climate , March 2022 , pp. 112 - 118
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agung, N., & Darma, G. (2019). Opportunities and challenges of instagram algorithm in improving competitive advantage. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 4(1), 743–747. Retrieved from www.ijisrt.com743,Google Scholar
Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J. (2010). Conducting research in schools: A practical guide. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(4), 397–407. DOI 10.1080/15248372.2010.516417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, E. (2015). Situational political socialization: A normative approach to young people’s adoption and acquisition of political preferences and skills. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(8), 967–983. DOI 10.1080/13676261.2015.1020926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2020). Schools. Retrieved December 5, 2020, from https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/education/schools/latest-release.Google Scholar
Bessant, J. (2020). Making-up people: Youth, truth and politics. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bessant, J. (2020b). From Denizen to Citizen: Contesting representations of young people and the voting age. Journal of Applied Youth Studies, 3(3), 223–240. DOI 10.1007/s43151-020-00014-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bostrom, A., O’Connor, R.E., Böhm, G., Hanss, D., Bodi, O., Ekström, F., …Sælensminde, I. (2012). Causal thinking and support for climate change policies: International survey findings. Global Environmental Change, 22(1), 210–222. DOI 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, M., & Medvecky, F. (2018). The disengaged in science communication: How not to count audiences and publics. Public Understanding of Science, 27(2), 118–130. DOI 10.1177/0963662516678351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conroy, M., Feezell, J.T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535–1546. DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Moor, J., Uba, K., Wahlström, M., Wennerhag, M., & de Vydt, M. (2020). Protest for a future II Composition, mobilization and motives of the participants in Fridays For Future climate protests on 20-27 September, 2019, in 19 cities around the world.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, M.X. (2000). Gen.com: Youth, civic engagement, and the new information environment. Political Communication, 17(4), 341–349. DOI 10.1080/10584600050178942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esbensen, F., Melde, C., Taylor, T.J., & Peterson, D. (2008). Active parental consent in school-based research: How much is enough and how do we get it? Evaluation Review, 32(4), 335–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, H.R. (2020). A rhetorical perspective on youth environmental activism. Journal of Science Communication, 19(6), C07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, H.R. (2021). Teen motivations for participation and non-participation in environmental protests. Frontiers in Political Science, 51. DOI: 10.3389/fpos.2021.662687.Google Scholar
Flack, C.B., Walker, L., Bickerstaff, A., & Margetts, C. (2020). Socioeconomic disparities in Australian schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic , Socioeconomic disparities in Australian schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Melbourne, Australia, Retrieved from ======https://search.proquest.com/docview/2449687330?accountid=14511%0Ahttps://ucl-new-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/openurl/UCL/UCL_VU2?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&genre=report&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Aaustralianeducationindex&atitle=&tit.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A., & Alvinius, A. (2019). Children’s protest in relation to the climate emergency: A qualitative study on a new form of resistance promoting political and social change. Childhood-A Global Journal of Child Research, 27(1), 78–92. DOI 10.1177/0907568219879970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Instagram. (2021). How instagram feed works. Retrieved January 6, 2021, from https://help.instagram.com/1617763228546325.Google Scholar
Krumpal, I. (2013). Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review. Quality and Quantity, 47(4), 2025–2047. DOI 10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maeseele, P. (2009). NGOs and GMOs a case study in alternative science communication. Javnost, 16(4), 55–72. DOI 10.1080/13183222.2009.11009014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marres, N. (2005). Issues spark a public into being: A key but often forgotten point of the Lippmann-Dewey debate. In Latour, B. & Weibel, P. (Eds.), Making things public. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 10.1145/1183316.1183334)Google Scholar
Mayes, E. (2019). The Mis/uses of ‘voice’ in (post)qualitative research with children and young people: Histories, politics and ethics. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 32(10), 1191–1209. DOI 10.1080/09518398.2019.1659438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, E. (2020). Student voice in school reform? Desiring simultaneous critique and affirmation. Discourse, 41(3), 454–470. DOI 10.1080/01596306.2018.1492517.Google Scholar
Mead, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Rimal, R.N., Flora, J.A., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). Information seeking about global climate change among adolescents: The role of risk perceptions, efficacy beliefs, and parental influences. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 20(1), 31–52. DOI 10.1080/15456870.2012.637027.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research. (2015). National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and the Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee. Retrieved from http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/e72.Google Scholar
Nilsen, A., Pleyers, G., & Cox, L. (2017). Social movement thinking beyond the core: Theories and research in post-colonial and postsocialist societies. Interface: A Journal for and About Social Movements, 9(2), 1–3.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (2003). Young people & political activism: From the politics of loyalties to the politics of choice? Paper presented at the Council of Europe Symposium, pp. 1–32,Google Scholar
Ostapczuk, M., & Musch, J. (2011). Estimating the prevalence of negative attitudes towards people with disability: A comparison of direct questioning, projective questioning and randomised response. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(5), 399–411. DOI 10.3109/09638288.2010.492067.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pechar, E., Bernauer, T., & Mayer, F. (2018). Beyond political ideology: The impact of attitudes towards government and corporations on trust in science. Science Communication, 40(3), 291–313. DOI 10.1177/1075547018763970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickard, Sarah. (2019). Politics, protest and young people. Political participation and dissent in 21st century Britain. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renes, S.L., Ringwalt, C., Clark, H.K., & Hanley, S. (2007). Great minds don’t always think alike: The challenges of conducting substance abuse prevention research in public schools. Journal of Drug Education, 37(2), 97–105. DOI 10.2190/T467-T0K6-8140-8635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C., Parr, N., & Muhidin, S. (2019). Mapping schools’ NAPLAN results: A spatial inequality of school outcomes in Australia. Geographical Research, 57(2), 133–150. DOI 10.1111/1745-5871.12317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Social Media News. (2020). Social Media Statistics Australia – January 2020.Google Scholar
SS4C Australia (2020). School Strike 4 Climate, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.schoolstrike4climate.com/.Google Scholar
Stocklmayer, S., Bryant, C., & Gore, M. (2002). Science communication in theory and practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Stuart, A., Thomas, E.F., & Donaghue, N. (2018). “I don’t really want to be associated with the self-righteous left extreme”: Disincentives to participation in collective action. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6(1), 242–270. DOI 10.5964/jspp.v6i1.567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vromen, A., & Collin, P. (2010). Everyday youth participation? Contrasting views from Australian policymakers and young people. Young, 18(1), 97–112. DOI 10.1177/110330880901800107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, E.F., Tubman, J.G., & Gil, A.G. (2004). Implementing school-based substance abuse interventions: Methodological dilemmas and recommended solutions. Addiction, 99(Suppl. 2), 106–119. DOI 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00858.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wahlström, M., Sommer, M., Kocyba, P., de Vydt, M., De Moor, J., Davies, S., …Buzogany, A. (2019). Protest for a future: Composition, mobilization and motives of the participants in Fridays for future climate protests on 15 March, 2019 in 13 European cities. Keele University.Google Scholar