Rapid Increase in Science Education - RISE. by PlanetRISE

I will "flesh out" the structure in the proposal when I get time; medical issues limit the time I can work on project. the basic structure would be a site similar to climatecolab where interested parties could propoae educational plans and methods, volunteer to participate as watchdogs, mentors, etc. A commitee would prioritize support of proposed projects and as possible provide support. As to your second question climite education would be intertwined with the basic foundational material; I envision a program that imparts lasting understanding of real principles rather that indoctrinating people to parrot ideas they really don't understand based on emotional appeals. the hope is that as the RISE clearing house matured people with great ideas will bring them to the table. The concept is to proceed at a different pace depending on local conditions. i would assume that local "nodes" could develope in specific areas to better represent the unique ploblems in said area. One key principle is all submitted idea must be based on sound science. I tend to think in broad strokes and it takes me a little while to eke out the details; roughly two months left so i'll try to get as much in before the deadline as possible. feedback is most appreciated.

@mohazzam. my comment about what works in california may not work in Afghanistan was an observation that resorce availabilty and local custum and culture will dictate how RISE programs would develop. As far as those in the developed world understanding the science I think you overestimate the level of real understanding of science in the developed world. For instance I am the product of the U.S. public school system, attende about three years of college where I obtained an associates in electronics and am currently pursuing a bachelors in education as time permits. I will freely admit that my level of real understanding of many basic scientific principles would be found laking were you to quiz me. The lack of real understanding of science among the public in developed countries allows special interest and politicians to propose and adopt "solutions" to climate problems that have not been properly vetted and may in the long term do more harm than good. As examples I would address the Fearmongering about both nuclear power and GMO crops. Both the aforementioned technologies have enourmous potential to be part of the solutions we need to provide clean power and sustainable production of food crops with less land use. while their are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed with both Nuclear power and GMO crops lobbiest and politicians use unscientific propaganda to try and convince the public that they need to be "protected" from two of the most promising solutions to the problems we have at hand. We still burn witches in the developed world; we just pick a technology that frightens people and demonize it. real scientist and educators must combat the flood of scientific nonsense that is promoted and get the public to think critically and understand what is really being proposed when solutions are presented. I am passionate about this because I think we have the tools available now to build a better world for all humanity but are held back by ignorance or willfull manipulation by those that see personal gain in not solving problems. An educated populace can more effectively hold their leaders accountable for real solutions.

A real cultural change is needed in order to slow down climate change, to minimize the damage we've been causing to the environment, and to leave a sustainable world for the next generations. Educating and raising awareness are essential, and should be done from kindergarten to college. There are already some programs and resources out there: http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework/830-environmental-literacy http://enviroliteracy.org/ http://celfeducation.org/ Science education is important, and may help promote change if environmental aspects are emphasized. Cheers !..

@lleveen thanks for the input. I know I have a lot more work to do on the details but I hope I have something that can grow with the input of others. too often egos, politics and cultural differences have prevented real progress. I beleive the internet provides a sort of "global conscience" wher the sensibility of proposed actions can be scrutenized by a much wider audience and therby improved upon.

Your comments "we have the tools available now to build a better world for all humanity....An educated populace can more effectively..." The world appears more informed today than more educated....the contents of education on climate change mitigation efforts at individual level / local levels will play a great role. Looking forward to furtherance of this proposal. Bests,

One suggestion would be to kick start this programs through roping in governments. For example in India that is large proportion of schools that is run by state(provincial) government. If this RISE program can be pushed through government's agenda it will have a real impetus. This would also have mechanism to track the roll out of RISE program and assess the impact of the project. Based on the success and learning of the program in government program similar project can be introduced through private schools. You could also think of doing pilot and use technology to have disruptive impact of the whole program. Keep up the good work. All the best!

Judge 1: The proposal outlines a plan to rapidly increase science education to increase urgency on climate change solutions and reduce misinformation or what the proposal calls "bad" science.The idea of increasing science literacy is appealing on its surface, but I'm not convinced that there is evidence that this strategy will work, and there is research suggesting that people who are more scientifically literate on climate change issues tend to be the most polarized people on both sides. Judge 2: There is no question that scientific literacy is a tremendous problem that we face today, on issues like climate change as well as GMOs, nuclear power, vaccines and autism, etc. The National Science Foundation estimates that 2/3 of Americans do not understand science or the scientific process. This makes them highly susceptible to pseudo-science and manipulation. But there are many people and organizations trying to overcome this ignorance. How is your proposal different in achieving similar aims?