There have been widespread calls to increase climate change knowledge in the
secondary curriculum. However, there is limited research examining consensus among
expert groups regarding what knowledge is most important and whether it should be
taught in science. This study explores expert perspectives on climate change knowledge
is secondary science in England, using data collected between 2021 and 2024.
This study makes a distinctive contribution by incorporating youth climate
activist perspectives, alongside expert science teachers and climate scientists,
recognising young people as knowledgeable stakeholders and experts by experience. A
hybrid Delphi-Q methodology was employed in three stages. First, a Delphi process
with 38 experts (10 science teachers, 12 youth climate activists, and 16 climate
scientists) identified and refined key climate change knowledge statements, resulting in
46 final statements. Second, these statements were analysed against the current
English secondary science curriculum. Third, a Q-sort with 21 participants (6 science
teachers, 6 youth activists, and 9 climate scientists) was followed by interviews to
examine how experts prioritised this knowledge.
The analysis identified a misalignment between expert-generated knowledge and
the current science curriculum, which emphasises a narrow, physical science-focused
account of climate change. In contrast, experts highlighted the importance of a broader
systems perspective that includes secondary risks and impacts. Four distinct
perspectives emerged. Some experts argued that secondary science should teach both
narrow and broader systems knowledge, communicating urgency but without
advocating action. Others emphasised teaching wider social, political and ecological
knowledge to cultivate eco-centric values and care. A third perspective prioritised
scientific reasoning, data literacy and critical thinking skills to counter misinformation.
A fourth foregrounded ethical considerations and climate justice, arguing that
understanding values and power within science is more importance that technical
scientific knowledge alone.
Overall, the findings show that differing views on climate change knowledge
reflect deeper disagreements about the purpose of science education, highlighting the
need for more transparent discussions of values in curriculum design, and clearer
consideration of how climate change education is positioned within and beyond
secondary science.
