1. If time allows watch episode 1, from Showtime’s Years of Living Dangerously, in its entirety and then come back to the specific segments highlighted below. If you are unable to watch the entire episode please watch the segments below. After watching each segment pair, have students work in small groups to answer the questions. Students need to record their answers in their science notebooks. You may want to show all clips in one day or separate them into two days. *Important Note* Provide students with these questions prior to viewing.
a. Harrison Ford Learns About Deforestation with NASA Scientists 1:35 to 2:20 and 10:05 to 12:29 [insert link to video here]
- What evidence supports impacts related to climate change? (at least 3)
- What primary and secondary sources are referenced in these two segments?
- What opinion(s) are voiced in these two segments?
- Who/what are the credible sources in these two segments?
- Explain how the credibility of a source is variable dependent upon the source.
b. Don Cheadle Talks with Dr. Hayhoe about the Intersection of Climate Change and Faith – 27:39 to 30:11 and 37:50 to 40:14 [insert link to video here]
- What are the “usual suspects”?
- How do the usual suspects support Dr. Hayhoe’s argument?
- What opinion(s) are voiced in these segments and by whom?
- Would you characterize Don Cheadle’s reporting, as biased or unbiased? Explain.
- Why do members of the evangelical community change their view point after hearing Dr. Hayhoe’s presentation?
- Provide examples of primary and secondary sources used in these two segments.
- Who are the credible sources in these two segments?
c. Thomas Freidman, Climate Wars 4-6:08 and 53:45-55:56 [insert link to video here]
- What issue(s) is Thomas Freidman trying to understand?
- What primary and secondary sources is he using to help further this understanding?
- What evidence is provided from the Syrian community?
- How would you classify the sources in these two segments? Credible – Not credible? Explain.
- What opinion(s) are voiced in these two segments?
*Important Note* Discussing the evidence and opinions found in each clip is important in helping students increase their critical thinking skills related to the world they live in including issues that affect us locally and globally.
2. Have each group trade science notebooks with another group (e.g. group 1 trade with group 2). Using the Evidence Sorter (either handed out earlier (see Explore) or project it for the class), have students evaluate the evidence using the scale referenced in the handout – strong, medium, or weak. As a group, the students not only choose their rating, but must also justify the rating with a full explanation.
For example:
Evidence: Nelly Montez says, when asked about why there has been such extreme drought conditions in Plainview that she believes “it’s biblical”.
Evidence Strength: weak
Explanation: Nelly did not provide evidence to support her claim that the conditions in Plainview could only be described as biblical. Nelly needed to provide evidence or specific details to support her claim, such as Genesis 2:15 “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.” “Take care of it” (shamar) is literally “guard” in Hebrew; the word means to superintend and protect in all ways.
3. Have the groups give their notebooks back and then bring the two groups together for them to discuss why they agree and/or disagree with their feedback. As this occurs, the educator should actively monitor the dialogue taking place.
For example: Group1 and Group2 have exchanged notebooks. They will each evaluate each other’s work and provide feedback. Then they will come together, 2 groups become 1, and discuss whether or not they agree or disagree and why.