International comparisons of school-level geoscience education– the UNESCO/IGEO expert opinion survey

ABSTRACT

An international survey of geoscience education has been carried out jointly by UNESCO and the International Geoscience Education Organisation (IGEO) to address the question of ‘How does school-level Earth science education compare across the globe? The survey gathered data from experts in 51 countries, comprising more than half the global population. Most countries (75%) had national standards covering Earth science but these were not followed or are absent in more than half the countries surveyed. Only around 25% of the countries with standardised assessments have Earth science-specific questions. Most teachers of Earth science are non-specialist teachers, whilst support of these teachers through courses and professional development is generally low, with very little financial support provided. Earth science teaching materials are reported to be generally of moderate to poor quality. However, there is good support globally for informal Earth science education and there are enthusiastic groups of educators attempting to address the rather bleak formal education situation. Strategies being used include the publication of an international syllabus with free-to-download supporting textbooks, websites of high-quality interactive teaching materials, national champions promoting interactive geoscience education, and global support for these initiatives.

KEYWORDS:

• Earth science education
• K-12
• survey

Background

This survey seeks to address the question of ‘How does school-level Earth science education compare across the globe?’, with a view to establishing a baseline against which future educational developments in the Earth sciences can be assessed and against which progress in individual countries can be evaluated. A strategy was devised to invite experts or expert groups in as many countries as possible to respond to a series of questionnaire questions focussed on this issue. Such a strategy does include issues of bias, but there appears to be no bias-free way in which information addressing this question could be collected. Nevertheless, the issue of potential bias is recognised by the title to this study of ‘an expert opinion survey’. The background to the survey is given below, together with a review of the limited literature comparing geoscience education across countries. The survey findings are summarised, finding a rather bleak global picture overall, and strategies designed to remedy this situation are described.

The International Geoscience Education Organisation (IGEO) was formed in the year 2000 and one of its priorities at that time was to establish the distribution and scope of Earth science education across the world. This was necessary as, although some idea of the national progress of Earth science education in different countries had been highlighted through the three International Geoscience Education Conferences that had taken place to that date (Clark, 1999; Fortner & Mayer, 1998; Stow & McCall, 1996), and a brief review covering 12 countries had been published in 1995 (King et al., 1995), no comparative overview had been attempted.

A second survey was undertaken in 2006 jointly by IGEO and the International Union of Geological Sciences Commission on Geoscience Education (IUGS-COGE).

In 2012, the IUGS hierarchy asked IGEO/IUGS-COGE to write up the results of the 2006 survey for publication. It seemed sensible at that stage to invite all those who had provided data for the second survey to update their data for 2012. The opportunity was also taken to invite new countries to participate, through both IGEO and IUGS. The third survey therefore included all the 2012 data, together with data from the 2006 survey from countries that were not able to update their information. The survey results were published in 2013 (King, 2013a) and are fully available on the IGEO website (King, 2013b).

The fourth international survey, the subject of this report, was carried out jointly by the International Geoscience and Geoparks Programme of the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Regional Office for Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the IGEO between May and September 2017. The results were published by UNESCO in 2019 (UNESCO, 2019a).

The first survey acquired data from 21 countries, the second from 27 countries, the third from 34 countries and the fourth from 51 countries worldwide.

International assessment of school-level geoscience

In the most recent Trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) assessment undertaken in 2015 by 9–10 year old (4th grade) and 13–14 year old (8^th Grade) students, Earth science items formed 20% of the survey (Mullis & Martin, 2013).

The TIMSS assessment of 9–10 year olds across 47 countries (Martin et al., 2016a) showed that Earth science was a relative strength in only seven of the countries but a relative weakness in 27. However, comparisons between the 2015 and a similar assessment carried out in 2011 showed that, of the 41 countries included, results had improved in 15 countries and declined in nine (p46). The Earth science results overall were poorer than those of the other areas of science. Teachers reported that their students had studied 66% of the Earth science topics (compared with 72% in life science but only 59% in physical science) (p171).

The TIMSS results for 13–14 year old assessment across 39 countries (Martin et al., 2016b) showed that Earth science was a relative strength in 15 but a relative weakness in another 15 of the countries. Comparisons between the 2015 and the 2011 surveys showed that, of the 34 countries included, Earth science assessment results had improved in 13 countries and declined in just seven. (p73). The Earth science results overall were similar to those of the other areas of science. Teachers reported that their students had studied 68% of the Earth science topics (lower than the 72–76% in biology, chemistry and physics) (p93).

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) global assessment for 15–16 year olds ran in 2015 (OECD, 2016). Earth and space items comprised 28% of the assessment (OECD, 2017). The results for different subject areas of science were reported separately; the mean performance for all countries was 493, with ‘Physical systems’ at 493, ‘Living systems at 492, and ‘Earth and space systems’ at 494. So students globally performed slightly better in Earth and space science than in the other two science areas. This should be set against the lower percentage of Earth and space science tasks in the assessment. We do not know about the quality of the PISA Earth science questions compared with other subject areas either (the anecdotal evidence from the UK of Earth science questions being of poorer quality than those in other subject areas is discussed below).

The most recent Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) global assessment for 15–16 year olds took place in 2018, where the percentage of tasks set for science related to Earth and space science was also 28% (OECD, 2018). However, the results for Earth and space science appear not to have been reported separately, so this cannot add to the global geoscience education picture.

Previous work on international geoscience education comparisons

The International Geoscience Education Conferences that have taken place every four years since 2000 have each included presentations on national school-level developments in geoscience education (Carneiro et al., 2018; GeoSciEd IV Organising Committee, 2003; GeoSciEd VI Organising Committee, 2010; Hlawatsch et al., 2006; Shankar, 2014) and national developments have also been covered in the education themes of the International Geological Congresses (IGC, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016). However, few attempts have been made to make comparisons of geoscience education between countries.

In 1999 a comparison of the development and status of geoscience education between Israel, England and Wales and the U.S.A. (Orion et al., 1999a, 1999b) concluded that, in all three countries there had been a move from discipline-based science towards integrated science, which included Earth science, and that this had been reasonably successful, despite a range of issues, both common and country-specific.

In 2005, Lee and Fortner compared the perceptions of geoscience educators of approaches to science education across 15 countries. The views of the 51 educators involved showed significant agreement that Earth science should be taught at all levels of schooling and that it should form an integral part of the science curriculum.

A survey by Chang et al. (2006) compared the Taiwanese Earth science curriculum with the proposals for Earth Systems Education (ESE) developed by Mayer in the United States (Mayer, 1997, 2002, 2003; Mayer & Armstrong, 1990), finding marked similarities between the Taiwanese curriculum and the Mayer proposals for the US.

The Learning Earth sciences chapter in the 2007 Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning concluded,

‘ … the ability of educators to establish earth science as a sustainable course of study in schools is highly dependent on the ability of science teachers to overcome many barriers, including their own lack of background and the persistently low stature of the field. This low stature is a function of the failure to understand ‘what’s so special about learning earth sciences’. (Orion & Ault, 2007, p. 679)

Meanwhile King argued in an overview of geoscience education that ‘ … geoscience education will only progress though ensuring geoscience education becomes part of the education of every child’ (King, 2008, p. 214).

In 2009, Park et al undertook a comparative study of Earth science education between the United States and Korea, based on the inquiry approach in school textbooks, concluding that inquiry-based methodologies were more widespread in the Earth science education of the Korean curriculum than in the US curriculum. Meanwhile Uçar compared elementary school Earth science education in the U.S.A. and Turkey, resulting in a number of recommendations for the Turkish education system (Uçar, 2009).

The UNESCO-AEON WORKSHOP Earth Science Education Initiative for Africa that took place in 2009 involved presentations and a Tour de Table, which concluded that Earth science education across Africa was poor, and, ‘that Earth Sciences Education must be introduced at the early stage of schools through practical and innovative methods’ (UNESCO-AEON, 2009).

In 2012 the Journal of Geoscience Education published a themed issue on Geoscience education and global development, explaining, ‘The five papers included in this section offer a range of perspectives on international geoscience education and serve as an excellent introduction to a broad topic.’ (Locke et al., 2012, pp. 199–200).

The book Earth science education: global perspectives, published in 2018 (Greco & Almberg, 2018) comprises chapters detailing progress in Earth science education in 27 countries across the world, but does not provide any comparative data. Similarly, the volume accompanying the UNESCO/IGEO survey provides details in Spanish of Earth science education in 11 Latin American countries (UNESCO, 2019b), but without including comparative data – since all the comparative data is provided in the companion volume.

Whilst the studies above provide some comparative insights into the breadth and depth of school-level geoscience education across the world, none of the publications cited gives a comparative view over a range of countries. The only publication with widespread comparative data is the report on the 2013 IGEO survey (King, 2013a).

Methodology

The 2017 survey run jointly by UNESCO and IGEO was an online SurveyMonkey™ questionnaire-based survey entitled: Experts survey on geoscience education: approaching Earth sciences in primary and secondary education. The self-declared experts who completed questionnaires on behalf of their countries had a range of backgrounds, described in more detail below. The survey comprised 140 questions. The first 17 questions were introductory questions relating to the country being represented and the names and backgrounds of the respondents. Question 18 related to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The following six questions linked to the job market in Earth sciences. Ten questions focussed on the profile of science in education. The questions focussing on specific levels in science education are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Numbers of questions focussing on different science levels in schools.

Question focus	Primary (elementary school) science	Lower secondary (junior high school) science	Upper secondary (high school) science	Totals
General science	7	7	11	25
General science assessment	4	4	4	12
Science teachers	4	3	3	10
Open question	1	1	1	3
Earth science	9	12	17	38
Totals	25	27	36	88

Of the remaining questions, seven focussed on extra-curricular activities in the natural sciences whilst nine considered nationwide events promoting Earth science. Overall, therefore 47 questions focussed directly on Earth science education.

Expert contributors from across the world were invited to take part in the survey. The UNESCO Regional Office for Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean sought involvement from Latin American countries, with 16 taking part. The International Geoscience Education Organisation (IGEO) encouraged its Council members to become involved and the call included members of the IUGS Commission on Geoscience Education. Thirty five additional non-Latin American countries responded to this call, so that 51 countries in total took part.

Each expert was invited to submit their credentials including a short curriculum vitae, and completed the online questionnaire either individually or through a collaboration of people in their country. The initial analysis was carried out by UNESCO and the report published in 2019 (UNESCO, 2019a). This paper focusses primarily on the findings relating directly to Earth science in the survey.

The data presented below is taken from two separate sections of the UNESCO report (UNESCO, 2019a). The data from the Latin American part of the survey is included in the chapter on Geoeducation in Latin America and the Caribbean, summarised by Denise Gorfinkiel. The data from those parts of the world beyond Latin America is included in the Earth science education across the globe chapter by Chris King. The inherent bias in combining these two different sets of data is discussed below, together with the methodology used to reduce the bias.

In this report, the terms ‘Earth science’ and ‘geoscience’ are used almost interchangeably, however ‘Earth science education’ is generally taken to cover a broader field than ‘geoscience education’ which focusses more closely on geology and related disciplines.

Areas of bias in the survey

The survey has different areas of bias, as described in Volume 2 of the UNESCO report (UNESCO, 2019a). Firstly:

It is important to notice that this survey has a built-in bias, in the sense that it is an opinion survey and not an in-depth study of the existing national curricula. Most respondents are academic experts in the field of Natural Sciences or Earth Sciences education, which has a strong interest on Geosciences teaching but who in some cases can be unaware of specific details of some general political or technical aspects of their national educational scene. In this sense, far for being conclusive, this study must be taken as a … general attempt to describe the current state of the art of Geoscience education. (UNESCO, 2018a, p. 39)

A second area of bias is the fact that the UNESCO Office in Uruguay sought to include as many Latin American countries as possible in the survey. This was a successful strategy and 16 of the 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean took part (48%) including the most populous countries. However the coverage of the world beyond Latin America was much less comprehensive, with only 35 of the remaining 162 (195 - 33) countries recognised by the United Nations being included (22%), although many of these were also the most populous countries. It is because of this inherent Latin American bias that much of the data reported is presented below as: (a) global data, with data from all 51 countries (with an attempt to reduce this bias mathematically), (b) non-Latin American data (from 35 countries) and (c) Latin American data (from 16 countries).

A third area of bias is the different sizes of the countries which contributed, from the most populous (China) to the least populous (Guyana) all if which were given equal weighting.

A fourth area of bias is the fact that some countries include a number of different educational systems (e.g. the U.S.A., India, Germany) which were summarised into one response.

In view of these issues, it is worth repeating: ‘far for being conclusive, this study must be taken as a … general attempt to describe the current state of the art of Geoscience education.’ (UNESCO, 2018a, p. 39).

Compilation of introductory data from the survey

The 51 countries which responded to the survey are listed in Table 2 and their distribution is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The distribution of countries with experts who took part in the survey. Latin American countries in pale grey. Annotated Google My Maps image.

Table 2. The 51 countries from which experts contributed to the UNESCO/IGEO international survey.

Argentina	Egypt	Japan	Portugal
Australia	El Salvador	Kyrgyzstan	Russia
Bolivia	Finland	Malawi	South Africa
Brazil	France	Mauritius	South Korea
Bulgaria	Germany	Mexico	Spain
Canada	Greece	Mongolia	Sri Lanka
Chile	Guatemala	Namibia	Turkey
China	Guyana	New Zealand	United Kingdom
Colombia	India	Nicaragua	United States
Costa Rica	Indonesia	Norway	Uruguay
Cuba	Iran	Pakistan	Venezuela
Denmark	Israel	Peru	Zambia
Ecuador	Italy	Philippines

Note: The 16 Latin American countries are shaded pale grey.

The 51 countries included in the survey comprise 26% of the 195 countries recognised by the United Nations. However many of these are the most populous countries, with a total population of more than 4.2 billion, comprising more than half (54%) of the world population of nearly 7.8 billion people (2020 figures).

Each of the contributors to the survey was a self-declared expert on school-level geoscience education, who was required to submit their curriculum vitae (CV) to demonstrate their expertise. Details of the backgrounds of those taking part in the survey are shown in Table 3, with most having postgraduate qualifications. Some were geoscience educational researchers, some were geoscience academics with an interest in school-level geoscience, some worked in national ministries or agencies for education and some were school teachers acting on behalf of national organisations. Most questionnaires were submitted by individuals but some national groups contributed. Many were members of international geoscience education organisations.

Table 3. Source of expertise of those completing the questionnaire (Global weighted %, n = 51; Non-Latin American %, n = 35; Latin American %, n = 16) (global weighted % = (non-LA % x 35/51) + (LA% x 16/51)).

Background	Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Holding PhD	74	80	62
Non-PhD holder with Masters degrees	21	17	31
From university	61	60	62
From research centre	16	17	13
From national ministry of education	10	9	13
From national agency for education	4	0	13
From school	6	9	0
From other organisations	3	5	0
Male	51	51	50
Female	49	49	50
IGEO Council members	55	77	6
International Union of Geological Sciences Commission on Geoscience Education (IUGS-COGE) Commissioners	14	20	0

Compilation of Earth science-related data

Earth science in the curriculum

Table 4 shows which countries have a primary (elementary) curriculum that contains Earth science and the degree to which the national curriculum is followed, according to the opinion of the experts. Table 5 shows similar data for the lower secondary (junior high) school curriculum and Table 6 shows the data for the upper secondary (high) school curriculum. All tables use the same weighting method to reduce the influence of the proportionally greater number of Latin American countries.

Table 4. Earth science in the primary (elementary) science curriculum (global weighted % calculated).

Primary (elementary) science curriculum		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Does your country have a curriculum for primary education that covers Natural Sciences? (Global n = 51; Non-LA n = 35; LA n = 16)	National curriculum	62	54	81
	National standards	16	17	13
	Sub-national curricula or standards	9	11	6
	None	12	17	0
	Total	99	99	100
Do Earth sciences form part of the curriculum? (or standards) (Global n = 40; LA n = 15; Non-LA n = 25)		83	80	87
In your opinion, how closely is the Earth sciences content of the curriculum followed in most schools? (Global n = 40; Non-LA n = 25; LA n = 15)	Very closely	8	13	0
	Quite closely	50	42	62
	Not very closely	39	40	38
	Largely ignored	3	5	0
	Total	100	100	100

Table 5. Earth science in the lower secondary (junior high) school science curriculum (global weighted % calculated).

Lower secondary (junior high) school science curriculum		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Does your country have a curriculum for lower secondary education that covers Natural sciences? (Global n = 51; Non-LA; n = 35LA n = 16)	National curriculum	69	60	88
	National standards	18	20	13
	Sub-national curricula or standards	6	9	0
	None	8	11	0
	Total	101	100	101
Do Earth sciences form part of the curriculum? (or standards) (Global n = 47; LA n = 16; Non-LA n = 31)		81	75	93
In your opinion, how closely is the Earth sciences content of the curriculum followed in most schools? (Global n = 47; Non-LA n = 31; LA n = 15)	Very closely	19	19	20
	Quite closely	43	48	33
	Not very closely	32	24	47
	Largely ignored	7	10	0
	Total	101	101	100

Table 6. Learning methods used in lower school Earth science teaching (Global weighted %, n = 36; Non-Latin American %, n = 21; Latin American %, n = 15).

Region	Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Fieldwork	44	33	60
Experimenting	53	57	47
Modelling	36	33	40
Problem-based learning	48	48	47

The Table 4 primary (elementary) school global figures show that, of the 87% of countries that have a national curriculum or standards 83% contain Earth sciences in the primary curriculum (with more countries in Latin America having both a national curriculum or standards and Earth science content). The 12% of countries with no national curriculum or standards (6 countries) and the 17% of countries that do have a national curriculum with no Earth science (7 countries) add up to 25% of countries worldwide that have no Earth science requirement in their curriculum. Figures for Latin America are better than the global data.

However, where Earth science is part of the curriculum, it is only followed very or quite closely in 58% of countries (42% ‘not closely’ or ‘largely ignored’). Figures for Latin America are similar to those for non-Latin American countries. This means that primary Earth science curriculum content is only closely followed in around 45% of countries worldwide, according to expert opinion.

The lower secondary (junior high) school data in Table 5 show that 92% of countries have a national curriculum or standards at a national or sub-national level with 81% of these having Earth science specified in the curriculum. Thus there is 8% of countries (4 countries) with no national curriculum and of those that have a national curriculum, 19% do not contain Earth science (9 countries). So 13 or 25% of countries globally have no Earth science in their lower school curriculum. As at primary level, figures for Latin America are better than the global figures.

In countries where Earth science does form part of the lower school curriculum, it is followed very or quite closely in 62% of countries and not so in 39%. Figures for Latin America are slightly poorer than elsewhere. So, globally, lower secondary Earth science curricula are followed closely in around 57% of countries.

The learning methods included in teaching the lower school Earth science curriculum are summarised in Table 6.

The lower school Earth science data show that active learning methods including fieldwork are included in the lower school Earth science curriculum of around half the countries worldwide.

Data for the upper secondary (high) school curriculum are given in Table 7 below.

Table 7. Earth science in the upper secondary (high) school science curriculum (global weighted % calculated).

Upper secondary (high) school science curriculum		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Does your country have a curriculum for upper secondary education that covers Natural sciences? (Global n = 51; LA n = 16; Non-LA n = 35)	National curriculum	74	71	81
	National standards	16	14	19
	Sub-national curricula or standards	6	9	0
	None	4	6	0
	Total	100	100	100
Do Earth sciences form part of the curriculum? (or standards) (Global n = 49; Non-LA; n = 33 LA n = 16)		78	68	100
In your opinion, how closely is the Earth sciences content of the curriculum followed in most schools? (Global n = 49; Non-LA n = 33; LA n = 16)	Very closely	14	13	17
	Quite closely	33	33	33
	Not very closely	39	38	42
	Largely ignored	14	17	8
	Total	199	101	100

The data for the upper secondary curriculum shows that 96% of countries have a national curriculum or standards for science; of these countries 78% include Earth science in the curriculum. This indicates that there is 4% of countries with no curriculum or standards (2 countries) and of these 22% (11 countries) do not contain Earth science. So a total of 13 countries (25%) have no Earth science in their upper secondary science curriculum.

Where Earth science is a component of the science curriculum, 47% of countries follow the curriculum very or quite closely, whereas the slight majority (53%) do not. Therefore only 18 countries across the world follow the Earth science curriculum closely, or 35% of countries. Latin American figures are better than those for other countries.

The global figures, by pupil age, are summarised in Table 8 for comparison purposes.

Table 8. Curriculum comparisons across pupil ages; data from tables 4–6 (n = 51).

School science curriculum	Primary (elementary) %	Lower secondary (junior high) %	Upper secondary (high) %	Global mean %
National science curriculum or standards	87	93	96	92
No national science curriculum or standards	12	8	4	8
Earth science forms part of the curriculum	75	81	75	75
Earth science does not form part of the curriculum	25	19	25	23
Earth science is in the curriculum and is (very or quite) closely followed	45	57	35	46

The summary shows that Earth science forms part of the curriculum in a mean of 75% of countries across the age ranges (38 countries) but not in the remaining 13 countries, globally. However, the Earth science curriculum is only closely followed in 46% of countries (23 countries) and is not closely followed or is absent from 54% of countries (28 countries).

The Earth science curriculum areas covered at each school level are shown in Table 9, which includes only those areas making up more than 30% of the data.

Table 9. Earth science curriculum areas covered at each school level comprising more than 30% of the curriculum (global weighted % calculated).

Primary (elementary)	Lower secondary (junior high)	Upper secondary (high)
Water on Earth – 94%	Earth sciences – 72%	Natural science – 53%
Solar system – 91%	Geology – 61%	Earth science – 50%
Weather – 88%	Natural resources – 58%	Environmental sciences – 50%
Landscape – 88%	Environmental sciences – 53%	Climate studies – 47%
Day/night and Earth's rotation – 85%	Atmospheric sciences – 53%	Geography (physical) – 47%
Climate change – 69%	Geography (physical) – 50%	Atmospheric science – 45%
Fossils – 61%	Geography (nature) – 47%	Geology – 41%
Environmental risks – 58%	Seismology – 45%	Hydrology – 36%
Soil erosion – 55%	Volcanology – 45%	Geography (nature) – 33%
Geological resources and heritage – 49%	Disaster risks – 44%	Volcanology – 31%
All available options in the questionnaire were indicated at more than 30%	Hydrology – 38%	Soil science – 31%
	Meteorology – 33%	19 of the options available in the questionnaire were indicated at less than 30%
	12 of the options available in the questionnaire were indicated at less than 30%

The assessment of Earth science

Table 10 summarises the provision for standardised assessment and the Earth science component of that assessment.

Table 10. Countries with standardised assessment and those that include specific Earth science questions.

Assessment	Primary (elementary) %			Lower secondary (junior high) %			Upper secondary (high) %			Global mean – all levels
Region	Global (n = 40)	Non-LA (n = 25)	LA (n = 15)	Global (n = 44)	Non-LA (n = 28)	LA (n = 16)	Global (n = 46)	Non-LA (n = 30)	LA (n = 16)
% countries with standard assessments	68	60	93	75	64	94	72	67	81	72
Region	Global (n = 30)	Non-LA (n = 16)	LA (n = 14)	Global (n = 33)	Non-LA (n = 18)	LA (n = 15)	Global (n = 46)	Non-LA (n = 30)	LA (n = 16)
% of countries with standard assessments which contain specific Earth Science questions	23	31	14	21	28	13	31	30	38	25

The assessment information shows that around three quarters of countries have standardised assessment, but that, of those, only around 25% have specific Earth science questions, with more at upper secondary level. The figures for Latin America are higher than for the rest of the world. The summary shows that that only around 8 of the around 31 countries that have standard assessments include specific Earth science questions.

Quality of Earth science written materials

The provision and quality of Earth science teaching-material available in schools is shown in Table 11.

Table 11. The quality and provision of Earth science-teaching material available (N/A = not applicable) (Global = globally weighted (n = 51); Non-LA = non-Latin American (n = 35); LA = Latin American (n = 16)).

Earth science teaching material		Primary (elementary) %			Lower secondary (junior high) %			Upper secondary (high) %			Global mean – all levels
Region		Global	Non-LA	LA	Global	Non-LA	LA	Global	Non-LA	LA
% countries where ES teaching material is available		74	74	75	82	84	81	80	80	81	79
Quality of ES teaching material	high	8	9	6	11	11	12	16	17	13	12
	moderate	65	63	69	59	60	56	63	63	66	62
	poor	10	14	0	14	17	6	10	9	13	11
	N/A	17	14	25	15	11	25	12	11	13	15

Earth science teaching material is available in around 80% of countries, which are likely to be those countries with Earth science in the curriculum. However in nearly two thirds of countries the teaching material is only of moderate quality (24 countries) whilst in some countries (4) it is poor. It is only of high quality in around 4 countries, according to expert opinion.

Training and resourcing for teachers of Earth science

The training available for teachers of geoscience in the responses to the question: ‘What evidence can be provided that teachers are prepared and supported with respect to teaching Earth sciences topics in [level] education?’ is given in Table 12 below.

Table 12. Training and resourcing for teachers of Earth sciences (Global = globally weighted (n = 51); Non-LA = non-Latin American (n = 35); LA = Latin American (n = 16)).

Training and resources available to ES teachers	Primary (elementary) %			Lower secondary (junior high) %			Upper secondary (high) %			Global mean – all levels
Region	Global	Non-LA	LA	Global	Non-LA	LA	Global	Non-LA	LA
Courses in geosciences areas	33	40	19	43	46	38	43	46	38	40
Professional development programmes on geoscience teaching	27	37	6	34	41	19	34	43	13	32
Lesson plans and other teaching resources	53	46	69	59	60	56	55	51	62	56
Financial resources to develop geosciences materials and/or acquire supplies for instruction	18	25	0	18	26	0	14	20	0	17
None	27	11	63	14	9	25	16	9	31	19

The training and resourcing figures show that whilst more than half the countries at the different teaching levels (primary, lower and upper secondary) were provided with lesson plans and other resources for teaching Earth science, the percentage provided with geoscience related courses was lower and only around a third had professional development programmes in teaching Earth science. Financial resources provided were low. Those countries that have no provision to support teachers of Earth science at any level were probably those countries where Earth science does not form part of the curriculum.

Earth science-related careers advice

The level of Earth science related careers advice offered is given in Table 13.

Table 13. Levels of careers advice offered. (Global = globally weighted (n = 34); Non-LA = non-Latin American (n = 24); LA = Latin American (n = 10)).

Region		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Extent of Earth sciences-related careers advice included in instruction	A lot	3	0	8
	Some	22	25	17
	Very little	50	50	50
	None	25	25	25

Three quarters of the countries surveyed recorded that very little or no careers advice relating to Earth science is available to students.

Nationwide events held regularly to promote Earth science

Details of the nationwide events held regularly to promote Earth sciences are shown in Table 14.

Table 14. Regular nationwide events promoting Earth science (Global = globally weighted (n = 51); Non-LA = non-Latin American (n = 35); LA = Latin American (n = 16)).

Region		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
Nationwide events for the promotion of Earth sciences are held regularly		49	48	50
Events are:	open to general public, although pupils and students are the main target	39	40	38
	focused solely on the school population	21	25	13
	focussed mainly at secondary level	14	20	0

The events held in half the countries surveyed are mostly general public events, although some are focussed directly on schools. Activities such as Earth science week, earth day, ocean day and science day were mentioned in the free responses.

Work of the Earth science education community

Table 15 summarises the work of the Earth science education community.

Table 15. Impact of the Earth science education community.

Region	Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
The country participates in Earth science olympiads (Global n = 51; Non-LA n = 35; LA n = 16)	49	60	25
Innovations in teaching Earth sciences have taken place at school level in the past 10 years (Global n = 50; Non-LA n = 35; LA n = 15)	58	66	40
Earth science educators have influenced social change (Global n = 47; Non-LA n = 32; LA n = 15)	66	63	73
Research groups focussed on Earth science teaching are present (Global n = 50; Non-LA n = 35; LA n = 15)	58	54	67

According to the globally weighted mean, around half of the countries worldwide which participated in the survey take part in Earth science olympiads, but is has to be noted that many of the experts consulted were International Geoscience Education Organisation (IGEO) council members and that the International Earth Science Olympiad is run by IGEO, so these figures may be biased.

Table 15 also shows that more than half the countries report innovations in Earth science teaching in the past ten years. The free reporting showed that these include responses to curriculum change and the development of new curriculum materials.

The influences on social change by Earth science educators reported in Table 15 by two thirds of countries included issues such as: conservation, environmental protection and the sustainable exploitation of natural resources.

More than half the countries which responded to the survey had research groups focussed on Earth science education, although this figure is biased by the fact that many of the contributors were members of the IGEO.

In the free responses to the questionnaire, there were reports of the importance of Geoparks, UNESCO world heritage sites and geosites.

Data on the provision of general extra-curricular activities

The data from the two datasets in the survey on the provision of extra-curricular activities for Natural science (including Earth science) are compiled in Table 16.

Table 16. Provision of extra-curricular activities.

Region		Global – weighted %	Non-Latin American %	Latin American %
National guidelines or recommendations encourage schools to provide extra-curricular activities (Global = globally weighted (n = 51); Non-LA = non-Latin American (n = 35); LA = Latin American (n = 16)).		61	63	56
Organisations providing extra-curricular activities (Global n = 22; Non-LA n = 13; LA n = 9)	museums and interactive science centres	87	85	89
	national parks or parks with an Earth science focus	64	70	56
	UNESCO geoparks and site protection networks	41	62	11
	public understanding organisations focussed on Earth science	50	62	33
	local ‘rockhound’ groups	46	23	78
	groups aimed at children	55	70	33
	Earth science content in Public Understanding of Science events	55	62	44
	private sector organisations	32	46	11

The data show that there are guidelines encouraging extra-curricular activities in more than half the countries surveyed, and that a wide range of organisations provide activities. Notable is that geoparks and site protection networks, groups aimed at children and private sector organisations are less prevalent in Latin American countries, whilst local rockhound groups are much more active there.

Discussion

This discussion on the Earth science elements of the UNESCO/IGEO survey should be prefaced by further reference to the potential bias in the data provided noted previously, and the fact that it is an opinion survey, based on the views of experts. This is therefore a ‘ … general attempt to describe the current state of the art of Geoscience education’ worldwide (UNESCO, 2019a, p. 39). The survey covered more than a quarter of the counties in the world comprising more than half the world population between them.

Where possible, comparisons are made with the results of the 2013 survey carried out by IGEO/ IUGS-COGE (King, 2013a) which are fully available on the IGEO website (King, 2013b). Differences could be accounted for by the reasons noted in the report published by UNESCO:

• The style of the questionnaire questions is different between the two surveys, prompting different responses.

• The questionnaire medium is different (paper questionnaire in 2013, electronic in this survey).

• The countries included in the survey are different.’ (UNESCO, 2019a, p. 36).

Also:

• Many of the ‘experts’ contributing to the current survey are different from those in the previous survey.

• Fewer countries were included in the 2013 survey.

• There may have been significant changes in educational situations between 2013 and the current survey.

Earth science teaching in schools

The data across all three school levels (primary – upper) in Table 8 indicates that Earth science forms part of the curriculum in 75% of the countries surveyed, but not in the other 25%. This is similar to the data from 34 countries in the 2013 survey that found Earth science formed part of the curriculum of 83% of countries (7-11 year olds, 85%, 11–14 year olds 88%, 14–16 year olds, 76%). It is disappointing that the data in this survey suggests lower Earth science curriculum coverage than the previous survey. Both surveys showed that Earth science teaching was most widespread at lower secondary (elementary) level. However, a question not asked in the 2013 survey related to how closely the curriculum guidance is followed. The current survey data shows a much bleaker picture, with the curriculum being closely followed in less than half the countries surveyed; it is not closely followed or is absent from 54% of countries, according to expert opinion.

Table 9 shows that, where Earth science is taught, its scope changes up the curriculum with the atmosphere and the environment forming key components at all levels. Earth science and geology as subject areas form important components of the curriculum above primary level, as does geography. At lower secondary level, experimenting Is used in more than half the countries, whilst problem-based learning, fieldwork and modelling are important in a range of countries.

The assessment data summarised in Table 10 shows that, of those countries with standardised assessment, only some 25% have specific Earth science questions. Given the general view that assessment drives the curriculum, this suggests that the status of Earth science in the curriculum worldwide is low. This is a somewhat surprising finding, given that Earth science assessment forms an important component of both the TIMSS and PISA international science assessment systems.

The relatively low status of Earth science in schools is mirrored by the quality of written materials available. Table 11 shows that, in the opinion of the worldwide experts, whilst educational material is available in some 80% of countries (presumably, those countries where Earth science is taught) its quality is only moderate in most countries and is poor in some. This is similar to the findings of the 2013 survey, which concluded, ‘more than half the textbooks for elementary [primary] students and more than a third of the textbooks for high school [secondary school] students are of poor quality or are not available.’ (King, 2013a, p. 26). This picture is supported by surveys of the Earth science content of textbooks globally (Francek, 2013) in the UK (King, 2010), the U.S.A. (AAAS – Project 2061,) and Spain (Sellés-Martinez, 2007), all of which found poor quality in the Earth science content.

Teachers of Earth science

The data from the 2013 survey (King, 2013a, p. 20) showed that Earth science was included in different secondary (high school) curriculum areas in different parts of the world, generally:

• part of Natural Science, mostly taught by biology teachers in southern Europe and Latin America;

• part of general science and geography in some countries;

• part of general science alone in some countries;

• part of science, but taught by Earth science specialists in countries on the eastern margin of the Pacific Ocean, and

• part of geography alone in some countries

The pattern was similar but not as clear in the current 2017 survey. However, the data from both surveys shows that secondary Earth science is mostly taught by either generalists or specialists in non-geoscience subject areas (apart from in eastern Pacific-rim countries).

The current 2018 data shows that more than half the countries provided lesson plans and other teaching resources to support teachers of Earth science, similar to the 2013 survey findings. The 2018 survey found that the provision of specialist courses was 40% and the provision of professional development was lower (32%), with little financial support being provided worldwide (17%). It seems that teachers of Earth science are not well-supported worldwide. The 2018 survey also indicated that very little or no Earth science-related careers advice was offered in most countries (75%).

Informal education

The 2018 survey collected data on the provision of extra-curricular activities relating to Natural science (Table 16), finding that in most countries (61%) this was a curriculum recommendation. The organisations that were most active in providing these activities across the world were museums and interactive science centres, followed by national parks or parks with an Earth science focus. However, a number of other organisations provided strong support including public understanding organisations in both science and Earth science, children-focussed groups, ‘rockhound’ groups and UNESCO geoparks and site protection networks. This picture of support is closely mirrored by the findings of the 2013 survey (King, 2013a, p. 26). In addition, nationwide events are held regularly to promote Earth science in half the countries across the world (Table 14), focussed on both the general public and schools.

The work of the geoscience education community

Groups of geoscience educators are active across the world (Table 15) in offering Earth science olympiad opportunities in half the countries (49%), and, in more than half the countries, supporting innovations in the teaching of Earth science (58%) and influencing social change (66%). The presence of geoscience education research groups was noted in more than half the countries (58%) by the group of experts, biased by their own backgrounds. This geoscience education activity is supported globally by the IGEO and IUGS-COGE and reflects well on the efforts by individuals and groups to meet some of the global shortcomings noted in the survey. Some of this work is recognised in the ‘My Earth science educator story’ project on the IGEO website (IGEO).

Addressing the ‘rather bleak’ situation

As shown in the discussion above, this ‘rather bleak ‘situation has existed for more than 20 years and is made more difficult by the fact that geoscience is taught through a range of different areas of the curriculum as well as (rarely) a ‘stand-alone’ subject. In regions where there is little or no geoscience taught, there is no capacity to research any interventions, and even where geoscience is taught at significant levels, geoscience is usually the ‘poor relation’ with little national support or recognition and little capacity for educational innovation or research. These issues are exacerbated by the fact that in some regions the school curriculum is controlled nationally whilst in others there is provincial control. In the latter case, geoscience-educational improvement have only local impact.

This bleak background prompts the question ‘Is the teaching of geoscience at school level important?’ In response, Gill (2017) and Gill and Smith (2020) have shown that geoscience contributes significantly to 13 of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals and 28% of the more detailed goals. Meanwhile, whilst some might argue that geoscience is becoming less important as the requirement for fossil fuels diminishes, the reality is that many more mined materials in much greater volumes than previously will be needed in the transition to renewable power. More geoscience support will also be needed in developing urban infrastructure and waste disposal capacity (Bullough, 2020). Meanwhile climate change is increasing geoscience hazard levels and water shortages worldwide, requiring a geoscience response. Geoscience is also critical to understanding how climate change has affected our planet in the past and its potential future impacts (Bird et al., 2020).

So the demand for geoscience understanding and for geoscientists is increasing at a time when the supply of geoscientists is diminishing, as highlighted by the reducing numbers of geoscientists taking undergraduate degrees in the U.S.A. (American geosciences, 2020) and the UK (Boatright et al., 2020) with similar anecdotal evidence in some European and African countries, and the UK government listing a range of geoscience jobs as ‘shortage occupations’ (Home Office website). It is argued in the UK that the reduction in applications for undergraduate geoscience degrees may be due to the government-induced decline in geoscience education in schools, but may also be due to the perception that geoscience contributes more to the climate change ‘problem’ rather than to the climate change ‘solution’ (Bullough, 2020). This situation has provoked new interest in school-level geoscience education amongst academic and other geoscientists in the UK (where three virtual ‘summits’ on the issues have been hosted by the Geological Society of London recently, together with one in South Africa).

Initiatives to address the global lack of geoscience understanding and of trained geoscientists have included the following.

• Increasing specialist geoscience education in schools. This has been very effective in Norway where the government instituted a new optional geoscience subject for 16–18 year olds and supported this by significant funding and teacher training.

• Increasing the amount of geoscience content in the science or geography curriculum in schools. When the South African curriculum was changed to include a much greater geoscience component than previously, this innovation was less successful than anticipated, due to poor staff training and poor curriculum materials, as shown by the 2018 survey. Where this has been more successful, as in the early days of the UK National Curriculum, one disadvantage has been that teachers and their students have not known they were studying geoscience, as in anecdotal comments such as, ‘plate tectonics is geography (rather than geoscience)’, ‘the water cycle is chemistry (rather than geography or geoscience)’. If pupils do not know they are studying geoscience, they are unlikely to want to study it further at Higher Education level.

• Increasing the amount of professional development provided to teachers of geoscience through other subject areas. The provision of support for teachers of geoscience in the primary, secondary science and secondary geography curriculum across the UK (King & Thomas, 2012) with strong evidence for its impact in schools (Lydon & King, 2009) has been successful, as is its current progressive roll out across the world (Correia et al., 2020).

• Increasing participation in the International Earth Science Olympiad (IESO) (IESO website). In 2019, 43 countries worldwide took part in the Olympiad. The particular success in Spain is that, because olympiad medal winners have easier access to Higher Education, the uptake of school students studying the optional 16–18 age geoscience courses has increased significantly.

• Running virtual ‘summits’ to discuss the issues, as outlined above.

Conclusion

The previous 2013 survey concluded that ‘most countries have national standards for Earth science’ and ‘there is fairly good coverage of Earth science in the school curriculum globally’ but that textbooks for secondary (high) school students were ‘of poor quality or not available’ (King, 2013a, p. 26). The geoscience education community at the time responded by:

• developing a recommended geoscience syllabus, to be encountered by all 16 year olds by the age of 16 (King, 2015) found on the IGEO website (IGEO);

• publishing a free-to-download textbook with activities and questions checked by geoscience experts to support the syllabus (King, 2019, 2020);

• maintaining and developing the Earthlearningidea website, with its steadily increasing numbers of Earth science teaching activities and translations (Earthlearningidea website) and more than 5 million downloads so far, worldwide; the activities are focussed on and extend the active learning methods included in Table 6 of the current survey (King, 2017).

Like the 2013 survey, the 2018 survey also found that most countries had national standards for Earth science (75%) however a question not asked in 2013, but included in the 2018 survey, was how closely the Earth science content of the curriculum was followed by teachers, according to expert opinion. The response to this question revealed that the Earth science curriculum is only closely followed in 46% of countries, so is not being followed or is absent in 54% of countries. This is a significantly bleaker picture than that shown by the 2013 survey. This bleak picture is summarised in the non-Latin American section of the UNESCO report (UNESCO, 2019a, p. 36) as: ‘the Earth science coverage of curricula across the world is variable, with significant numbers of countries having no reported Earth science curriculum; for those countries that do have Earth science curriculum guidance, the guidance is not closely followed in a significant number of countries’. This summary quotation can now be applied to the whole survey, despite the fact that the findings for Latin America were generally better than those for non-Latin American countries.

Only 25% of countries with standardised assessment include Earth science-specific questions. This is strange given the significant Earth science component of international science tests by TIMSS and PISA.

Reports of the generally moderate to poor quality of Earth science teaching materials highlighted previously, have been endorsed by the 2018 survey findings. Meanwhile, given that most teachers of Earth science are non-specialist, the generally low provision of courses and professional development and the very low financial support are all matters for concern. However, within this rather bleak situation, it is encouraging that informal education in Earth science is being supported, and that there are enthusiastic groups of Earth science educators across the world attempting to address the situation.

Given this background, how should the geoscience education community respond to the current bleak situation, as outlined by the 2018 survey? Effective strategies are likely to include:

• wider publicity and use of the IGEO syllabus and textbook initiative to encourage countries and provinces implementing curriculum change to include more geoscience and more geoscience assessment in the curriculum;

• further development of websites like the Earthlearningidea website to offer high quality and interactive Earth science teaching material and online professional development workshops to teachers across the world, free of charge;

• appointing champions across the world to train non-specialist teachers in the teaching of accurate and engaging geoscience, as in the European Geosciences Union (EGU) and IGEO/IUGS-COGE Field Officer initiative currently being rolled out to hundreds of teachers (Correia et al, 2020);

• providing more Geoscience Information for Teachers (GIFT) workshops to teachers around the world (GIFT is an EGU initiative developed from an American Geoscience Union (AGU) initiative), offering updating and training to hundreds of teachers per year (Laj et al., 2017);

• supporting the International Earth Science Olympiad (IESO) and supporting new countries wishing to join the Olympiad;

• enhancing the support by EGU, IGEO, IUGS-COGE and related organisations for international geoscience educational developments;

• publicising the fact that Earth science forms an important component of international science assessments, such as TIMSS and PISA;

• drawing attention to the global shortage of geoscientists, as highlighted, for example, by the ‘Tier 2 Shortage Occupation List’ published by the Home Office in England (Home Office website) listing a range of geoscience shortage occupations;

• highlighting the key contribution played by geoscience to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (STGs) (Gill, 2017; Gill & Smith, 2020) and to future sustainable societies across the globe;

• supporting all the agencies providing informal geoscience education, including the UNESCO geopark network.

The final conclusion to the latest survey has not changed from the 2013 survey: ‘There are success stories in school-level geoscience education across the globe, and these successes need to be celebrated, and the lessons learned from them distilled and disseminated worldwide, through active national and global support networks’ (King, 2013a, 28). The 2018 survey emphasises this view, whilst the demand grows for geoscience understanding and for geoscientists across the world.

Acknowledgements

Grateful thanks are due to the International Geoscience and Geoparks Programme of the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Regional Office for Science in Latin America and the Caribbean, for leading this survey, for promoting the survey to networks across Latin America, for setting up and managing the questionnaire and data analysis, and for publishing the results. Thanks are also due to the International Geoscience Education Organisation (IGEO) for supporting the survey and widening its brief to become global. The IGEO was supported by the International Union of Geological Sciences Commission on Geoscience Education (IUGS-COGE) in this endeavour. Between them these two organisations encouraged contributions from 35 different countries from across the world, and we are most grateful to all the IGEO Council members and IUGS-COGE Commissioners who contributed.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).