Students engaging with climate education at the Queensland Museum are encountering materials linked to the fossil fuel industry. Resources branded by the Shell Queensland Gas Company (QGC) have been identified in educational materials, raising concerns among environmental advocates about potential bias in climate science education. The environmental communications charity Comms Declare has characterized this as “climate obstruction dressed up as education.”
The issue came to light after several examples of Shell-branded classroom resources were discovered, including materials on ocean acidification that notably omit any mention of fossil fuels. This omission is critical, as burning fossil fuels is widely recognized as a primary contributor to ocean acidification, which poses a significant threat to coral reefs and marine ecosystems. The educational materials encourage students to research carbon capture technologies, which are aimed at removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and oceans. However, experts have labeled these technologies as often costly and unreliable, referring to them as a “PR fig leaf” for the fossil fuel sector.
In August, Queensland Education and Arts Minister John-Paul Langbroek confirmed that the Queensland Museum received $800,000 from Shell to fund its Future Makers program, designed to inspire students to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) during the 2024/25 academic year.
Concerns Over Educational Integrity
In a statement to the Australian Associated Press (AAP), the Queensland Museum defended its partnership with Shell, emphasizing that it enables the museum to reach over 200,000 students statewide through its STEM education initiatives. The museum reported that since the program’s inception in 2015, 89 percent of participating teachers have reported increased confidence in teaching STEM subjects.
The museum acknowledged Shell’s involvement transparently, recognizing the company on its website and through various educational resources. Furthermore, the museum is currently reviewing all its learning materials as it transitions to a new curriculum.
However, the partnership has sparked scrutiny regarding financial ties between fossil fuel companies and educational institutions. The Western Australian Museum has faced criticism for its collaboration with Woodside Energy, while Monash University recently ended its affiliation with the oil and gas company following mounting pressure from faculty and students. Meanwhile, Questacon, the national science centre, has ceased accepting funds from its two main fossil fuel sponsors.
Belinda Noble, founder of Comms Declare, expressed concern that such partnerships should raise alarm bells across the nation. “We wouldn’t let Big Tobacco sponsor teaching materials—fossil fuel companies shouldn’t shape how kids learn about the climate,” she stated.
Implications for Climate Education
Dr. Eve Mayes, an expert in pedagogy and education at Deakin University, pointed out that the report illustrates a troubling trend of “obstruction via omission” in educational materials, where discussions of fossil fuels are minimal while technological solutions like carbon capture are highlighted. “Who does this serve?” she questioned. In her research, Dr. Mayes noted that systemic underfunding in the school system has created opportunities for vested interests to influence educational content.
Dr. Mayes also highlighted the risks associated with funding from corporate entities, stating, “When you have gift economies at work, there is the risk of steering how teaching and learning about issues like climate change are shaped.” She added that young people are increasingly aware of corporate influence, which can lead to feelings of despair regarding climate action.
As the debate continues, the impact of fossil fuel sponsorship on education remains a contentious issue, highlighting the need for transparency and integrity in the teaching of climate science. Shell Australia did not provide a comment regarding these developments.
