A recent controversy has sparked a debate about the role of museums in climate education. The Queensland Museum, through its partnership with Shell's Queensland Gas Company, has been accused of misleading teachers and students about the root cause of climate change.
The Power of Influence: Unraveling the Climate Education Debate
This multimillion-dollar partnership, which began in 2015, has raised concerns among climate advocacy groups. Comms Declare, a climate advocacy organization, reviewed the museum's educational materials and found a significant omission - the burning of fossil fuels, a key driver of the climate crisis, was not explicitly mentioned.
Belinda Noble, founder of Comms Declare, highlighted the issue, stating, "It's climate obstruction disguised as education. We must question the influence of fossil fuel companies on how our children learn about the environment."
The Future Makers program, designed for students in years 7 to 10, explains the rise of greenhouse gases and its impact on global warming. However, it fails to address the primary cause - the burning of fossil fuels, including gas.
When discussing ocean acidification, the program "never identifies fossil fuel combustion as the dominant source" of ocean chemistry changes, according to CommsDeclare. Instead, students are encouraged to design carbon capture and storage systems, a technology that climate scientists believe should be a last resort, not a primary solution.
Climate scientists emphasize that the best approach to tackling the climate crisis is to stop burning fossil fuels, which release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Comms Declare revealed that Shell has contributed over $10 million in sponsorship to various museum programs since the partnership began. The Future Makers materials have been downloaded 400,000 times, and Shell's support has provided free professional development in STEM fields for 1,700 teachers.
Lesley Hughes, a climate change scientist and professor, expressed her dismay, saying, "It's appalling that a fossil fuel company is involved in educating young people who will bear the brunt of their climate-damaging activities."
Shell's involvement in children's science education is not new. The company has previously sponsored teacher development and children's science shows at Questacon in Canberra for 37 years, a partnership that ended in 2022.
Dr. Eve Mayes, a researcher studying the influence of fossil fuel philanthropy on teaching, referred to these practices as "petro-pedagogies." She highlighted that the Future Makers program is just one example of fossil fuel companies influencing education.
"There's a clear conflict of interest here. Teachers often struggle to find resources, and we must question the extent to which these companies are shaping climate change education," she said.
The Comms Declare report emphasized the impact of this omission, stating, "By excluding fossil fuels from climate change lessons, these materials undermine students' understanding of cause and effect. Students may know CO₂, but they may not understand its origin or the importance of reducing fossil fuel use. This erodes the foundation of climate literacy."
The group has called for the Queensland Museum to review and potentially withdraw or rewrite the materials. They also advocate for ending the museum's association with Shell once the current contract expires.
Shell Australia declined to comment on the matter.
Guardian Australia reached out to the Queensland Museum, asking about the program's review and the appropriateness of a fossil fuel company sponsoring climate change education materials for children.
The museum defended its program, stating, "Our hands-on science and technology initiatives inspire the next generation of scientists and innovators. We've delivered real results for Queensland's teachers and students, empowering young people and educators with essential STEM skills for the state's future."
The museum further clarified that all its learning resources align with federal and state education curriculums and will be reviewed as new versions are released.
This controversy raises important questions about the influence of corporate sponsorship on education and the responsibility of institutions to provide unbiased and accurate information to students.
What are your thoughts on this matter? Should museums and educational institutions accept sponsorship from fossil fuel companies, or is it a conflict of interest that could impact the integrity of climate education?
