Is our public school science education controlled by Exxon et al?

Largest science Teachers Organization Rejects Gore Video … Why?

By: John F. Borowski
t r u t h o u t | Guest Columnist

Tuesday 28 November 2006

Would the world’s largest science teacher’s organization ignore climate change education? (Why did the NSTA say no to free “An Inconvenient Truth” DVDs?)

The National science Teachers Association (NSTA) has spurned 50,000 free DVDs of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and is squandering a golden opportunity to educate tens of millions of youth in the United States! Why? This 55,000-member organization of teachers and scientists could use Al Gore’s film to orchestrate the single most influential educational goal in human history: the awareness and subsequent solving of climate change. There is no denying the escalating list of climate change evidence: from the potential extinction of polar bears and retreating glacial environments to the increase of global temperatures in unison with increased carbon dioxide levels.

Laurie David, a producer of the film “An Inconvenient Truth,” helped to broker a “sweet deal” for the NSTA. Sitting in an LA warehouse are 50,000 free DVDs just waiting to be given out to every member of the NSTA. No strings, no catches, just a clear and simple agenda: provide teachers with a spectacular and scientifically acclaimed production to engage millions of students nationwide. And the NSTA says, “No?”

Is the NSTA placing economic expediency over “true science education”; does it fear the alienation of funders such as Exxon and the fossil powerhouse the American Petroleum Institute? Laurie David, who is also the founder of StopGlobalWarming.org, received an email refusal of the free teaching materials from the NSTA that is ominous and foreboding.

Read the whole essay [here] and then take action.

John F. Borowski is a science teacher of 26 years; his pieces have appeared in the New York Times, UTNE Reader, Counterpunch, Commondreams and many other sites. He can be contacted at jenjill [at] peak.org and urges you to email Gerald Wheeler.

-- JockGill

spike Says:

Laurie David should offer the 50,000 “Inconvenient” DVDs to other countries.
It’s good to spread the information as far as possible. The publicity should also be used to shame the US

Andrew Revkin Says:

NSTA has responded to Laurie Davide here (www.nsta.org) and also has a Q&A ongoing on the issue.
Worth a look.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JockGill Says:

NSTA has a position statement on
Environmental education that was adopted in February 2003. It is at [www.nsta.org/positionstatement&psid=9]

All of the references on the page are from 2001 or earlier.

That the NSTA’s position on Environmental education is so static raises the question of how dynamically engaged the NSTA is in this endeavor.

Has corproate sponsorship in any way held them back?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

RussellPotter Says:

Corporate sponsorship seems to be a common thread here in the early discussions, with corporate influence bending both ways. An Inconvenient Truth is a great film, but it might not necessarily be the best way to teach about global warming in all school systems and grade levels. No matter whether the news you want to get out is pro-active on global warming or not, corporate money is always going to be part of how it gets out. Even my NOVA show, as I discovered on watching it air, was brought to you by the good people at British Petroleum, and Nanook of the North was sponsored by a fur company ,,,

JockGill Says:

Russell,

I do not agree that your statement “corporate money is always going to be part of how it gets out” is a given.

But this goes to the deeper issue of Corporate Personhood. For a good primer on this topic, I recommend Thom Hartmann’s Book “Unequal Protection” at [www.thomhartmann.com/summary.shtml]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

RussellPotter Says:

Hi JockGill,

Actually, I completely agree with the critique you cited of the spurious notion of corporations as “persons” or legal entities. The trouble is that, without corporate funds (and here I’d include ostensibly non-profit outfits like the McArthur foundation or Bill and Melinda) very few scientists or explorers would be able to affort to do what they do. What’s really needed is a much larger public commitment from entities such as NSF, which would require much more money. Right now, private capital is growing, along with its share of funding research, far far faster than the public sector. The situation is very sad.

RP

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.