#411: Critical Reasoning for a Changing Climate

Amid climate disruption and contested digital information, this qualitative case study examines how upper-elementary students evaluate climate information and craft persuasive arguments. Twenty-two Grade 5–6 students from four Canadian schools participated in semi-structured interviews. Guided by critical information literacy (CIL) and socioscientific reasoning (SSR), interviews included a source-ranking task and an audience-focused persuasion scenario using institutional datasets (NASA/NOAA), local records, and personal/community narratives etc. Students privileged scientific and educational authorities, required traceability, and were skeptical of open platforms (e.g., YouTube) and influencer content; several also attended to domain-specific expertise. When persuading others, students layered personal/local stories with empirical evidence and tailored choices to audience identity and interest—early expressions of SSR. Findings indicate that brief, explicit prompts can surface and strengthen elementary learners’ credibility heuristics and rhetorical judgment. We argue for integrating CIL-SSR practices into elementary climate and science education to foster digital discernment, ethical reflection, and civic agency.