The Canary in the Coal Mine: Frank Granshaw on Glaciers and Earth Science Education

The Canary in the Coal Mine: Frank Granshaw on Glaciers and Earth Science Education

In 1998, glacial geologist and climate science educator Frank Granshaw inventoried and studied the impact of glaciers in the North Cascades National Park complex. This is the first inventory since 1958.

The North Cascade National Park complex represents 25 percent of the glaciers in the United States and is an important source of water for nearby residents and ecosystems that depend on glacier runoff. Despite their importance, these glaciers have been largely unstudied for decades. Although glacial changes frequently make headlines and are often used as a leading indicator of increased global warming, these changes can have local effects that often go unmentioned.

Granshaw has since conducted further research and produced textbooks for Earth Science students. He received his PhD in Geology and Earth Science Education from Portland State University, where he is now an adjunct faculty member teaching geology to undergraduates.in a recent interview Glacier Hub Writer Aliyah Elfar, who discusses changes in earth science education and the importance of glaciers in climate science and beyond.

The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Why did you decide to become a glacier geologist?

My undergraduate degrees are in physics and psychology. In my thirties, I plan to go back to graduate school for an education. My main job has been as an Earth Science Educator. When I went back for my first master’s degree, I was told “you’re going to have to study 30 hours of graduate-level science”. I thought about physics for about 15 minutes and decided I would do geology.

My connection to geology comes from my mom. When I was 8 or 10 she asked me if I wanted to join 4H [a youth development program] I said ‘we don’t live on a farm’ and she said ‘they have geology’ so I joined 4H geology. I did this for about 10 years, then left and did other things, and then in my early thirties, I thought, “Maybe I should go back and do this.”

So I got into geology as an earth science educator, and then when I got my second master’s degree, I thought, “I’m interested in glaciers, so let me see what I can do with it.” Lucky The thing is, in the department at Portland State University, we have a glaciologist who just joined. Then, I chatted with him and got stuck. That’s why I connect with glacial geology.

How did you get into education specifically? What prompted you to switch from geology to education?

This is a long-term interest. When I say I study physics, it’s actually physics secondary education. So the grand plan is to become a high school physics teacher.

Obviously, this is not the path I have chosen. When I left my undergrad, I stayed out for a couple of years and then started working at a science museum to restart science education. I worked at the Lawrence Hall of Science in Berkeley and then started working at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry.

I’ve always enjoyed the combination of being able to work with people and help them understand some nerds that I find interesting. I also had the opportunity to do exhibit development and program development and found that I really enjoyed it.

As an educator, how has your perception of climate change affected?

This thing has been on my mind.This New York Times article [in which Granshaw was also interviewed] A little moved. What motivated me to be more active in climate education advocacy was having my granddaughter fall asleep sitting on my lap wondering what her world would look like in 2050 or 2060. For the same reason, my teaching career has been largely with undergraduates. So I had the same experience with them. What will their future look like? What options will they have because of what we’re doing now?

How have you experienced changes in earth science education?

I’ve seen the politics of earth science education change a lot. The geoscience departments where I do graduate work tend to be very conservative. In geology, your choice is to go into academia or go into the mining industry. Environmental geology and climate issues are considered nonsense. This is no longer the case. We still have some people who are deeply entrenched in the industry, but even some of them have a different perspective on their industry.

Another thing is that inquiry-based learning is more open. In other words, give students a chance to explore instead of “sit down and I’ll fill your head with content for the next two hours”. Better understanding of motivation and focus on process. I really enjoy this change.

Are you trying to make specific changes to inquiry-based learning, and have you tried other changes in your educational material development?

Well, I’m definitely still learning how to talk less and give students more time to explore. This is difficult because some students do want traditional lectures and think all this inquiry-based stuff is nonsense.

The task at this particular moment is how to make the development I’m doing more of a collaborative project. In fact, I follow an inquiry-based learning style called guided inquiry. Providing scaffolding for students is important because they often wonder “what do you want me to do to get the grades I need from this course.” Like it or not, how students are assessed can affect their future. Therefore, those who want to encourage students to learn through inquiry should provide them with the scaffolding so that they can be successful in this area.

How your experience studying glaciers and geology affects how you develop educational materials, especially your climate toolkit, which provides Activities and experiments to help non-scientists conduct their own climate research?

I think it gives it more meat in some ways. I mean, as I said, my first master’s degree was teaching and my second was a master’s degree in geology. During my first master’s degree, I would meet people who specialize in science education who don’t necessarily have a strong scientific background. They have a strong educational background. Many of their criticisms of the way science is taught are in some ways quite reasonable.

But I think if you can find those rare examples where someone has developed a curriculum with both a good science background and a good education/psychology background, that makes for a richer mix. I became a teacher first, then a researcher. Many undergraduates do the exact opposite: They become researchers first and then teachers through trial and error. I found that, as a teacher, this research tells me what my curriculum development looks like in the first place.

Mount Shuksang is a mountain in the North Cascades National Park complex and contains one of the 312 glaciers in the park complex. Source: Ron Clauson/Wikimedia Commons

Have you ever encountered climate change denial of teaching undergraduates?

I did meet them. I spent 25 years teaching community colleges, teaching general earth sciences. Even in climate science classes, I meet some climate change deniers. I remember an example of some civil engineering students always trying to trip me up. I occasionally have some good discussions with them.

Sometimes you do have people out there because they’re trying to prove it’s a bunch of nonsense. I’d say most people are there because that’s their concern. But you have some people who are fence guards, and then you have climate change deniers trying to get ammunition to back their case.

Interestingly, with all the available evidence, many people, even those who have studied climate science, still don’t think this is true.

I think part of the reason is that any time you work in science, there is a certain level of uncertainty.I think of some people I know who have been [extractive] industry. It’s a tough psychological struggle to come to the conclusion that you’ve spent your whole life in an industry that can do a lot of damage. Getting older is understandable. You don’t want to feel like you’ve wasted your life. The uncertainty of science gives them room to move towards climate denial, if you will, if it helps protect their sense of self-worth.

One of the tragic things about our political climate right now is that it’s not the hard-working people who need to feel sorry. There are some flipsides to using fossil fuels – national parks exist because people can easily drive there. This was a good thing for a while, but we have to change now. It’s like having too much water in your basement. Water is a good thing, but not when it comes out of your basement.

Is there anything else you want the public to know about glaciers?

In the context of academic research like my master’s thesis, one question is always, “Who cares except those who like to see glaciers or climb them?” My master’s thesis advisor asked me to try and track the North Cascades Summer runoff from glaciers and when flow peaks occur.We found that the traffic spike occurred earlier this year [than it used to]. Again, who cares? The answer is fruit farmers on the eastern side of the Cascade Mountains, who rely on glaciers to release water until the drier part of the year. Glaciers are the canary in the coal mine. This has been a huge issue whenever Glacier geeks talk to the public. Glaciologists are talking about major parts of people’s watersheds and their entire water budget. So yes, there is a practical side to all this silly academic stuff.