1 Introduction

To signify humanity’s profound impact on Earth, a small group of scientists introduced a new geological concept of the Anthropocene, literally meaning the human epoch, in the early twenty-first century. Since its inception, this concept has rapidly spread beyond scientific realms into the humanities, social sciences, and the arts, becoming a focal point of cross-disciplinary collaborations, conversations, and debates. Even in its official announcement of rejecting the proposal for an Anthropocene Epoch as a formal unit of the Geological Time Scale—the proposal that was voted down in March 2024—the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) says that this concept will remain “an invaluable descriptor of human impact on the Earth system.” The IUGS acknowledges that “the Anthropocene will nevertheless continue to be used not only by Earth and environmental scientists, but also by social scientists, politicians, and economists, as well as by the public at large” (IUGS, 2024, para 1). This prompts the question: how can the Anthropocene be effectively taught in science classrooms?

The Anthropocene has inspired a variety of approaches, each distinct yet interconnected. For instance, endeavours to establish conclusive stratigraphical evidence have progressed alongside studies investigating the correlation between changes in the Earth system and socioeconomic activities, as illustrated by the graphs depicting the “Great Acceleration” (Steffen et al., 2015a, 2015b). Similarly, contemplating the potential extinction of Homo sapiens (Barnosky et al., 2011) and grappling with the grave disparities in human suffering represent different challenges. How can we integrate the complexity and reflexivity inherent in the Anthropocene into science education? Furthermore, how can the controversies surrounding the Anthropocene be used to deepen our understanding of scientific progress?

This paper seeks to address these questions by proposing a university-level educational curriculum that not only explains what the Anthropocene is but also delves into its discussions and debates across various fields of study. The primary pedagogical objective is to foster Anthropocene literacy. This term gained traction within the scholarly community through the Anthropocene Curriculum (AC), a decade-long initiative (2013–2022) aimed at developing experimental and experiential approaches to knowledge formation in response to our rapidly changing planet. Sponsored by the Haus der Kulturen der Welt (HKW) and the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin, this initiative was instrumental in shaping our understanding of the Anthropocene (Rosol, 2021). In contrast, specifically focusing on science education for STEM students, we elaborate on this concept by proposing three key components of Anthropocene literacy: understanding the nature of science through the lens of the Anthropocene, embracing a multidisciplinary approach, and gaining insight into the impact of human activities on the Earth. These components serve as the cornerstone of our proposed educational framework, which aims to equip students with the knowledge and critical thinking skills necessary to comprehend the complexities of the Anthropocene and its implications for our planet.

2 Background: Researching and Teaching the Anthropocene

2.1 Anthropocene Discourse

Since its inception by Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stomer in 2000 (Crutzen & Stomer, 2000; Crutzen, 2002), the Anthropocene has emerged as a concept symbolizing humanity’s ascension as a major geological force capable of reshaping Earth’s history. The geological community faced the unprecedented challenge of defining a new epoch first used by outsiders, a task typically reserved for stratigraphers. In response, the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) set up the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) in 2009 to evaluate this concept’s validity and identify a standard geological marker, known as the Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), for officially designating a new human-induced geological epoch. After 14 years of investigation and discussion, the AWG submitted its proposal in 2023 advocating the establishment of a new epoch. They proposed the year 1952 as the onset of the Anthropocene, citing plutonium residue from intensified nuclear bomb testing around that time as the principal geological marker found globally. Crawford Lake near Toronto, Canada, presented the most compelling sedimentary evidence, they found. However, the SQS members ultimately voted against the proposal, a decision upheld by two higher organizations, the International Commission on Stratigraphy and the International Union of Geological Sciences (Witze, 2024a, b).

This series of decisions represents a remarkable outcome made through extensive open and closed debates. It is essential to recognize that the final verdict does not negate the acknowledgment of human impact on Earth. Rather, it underscores the necessity for embracing diverse perspectives and methodologies in comprehending this impact. Both the past and ongoing discussions on the Anthropocene continue to yield valuable insights and novel approaches to the understanding of human–environment interactions (Table 1). The discourse on the Anthropocene indeed spans across diverse fields. While it may be challenging to capture the entirety of this discourse in a single chart, categorizing knowledge produced within different disciplines can provide a useful overview of trends. It is important for instructors teaching the Anthropocene to adopt an open-minded approach and actively engage with various fields to explore the concept comprehensively. This ensures that students can be exposed to a diverse array of perspectives, enabling them to develop a nuanced understanding of the Anthropocene and its far-reaching implications.

Table 1 Major Anthropocene research areas outside geology (adapted from Choi & Park, 2019; Shon, 2024)
Full size table

Establishing clear pedagogical objectives is crucial for addressing these diverse approaches. In the following subsections, we delineate Anthropocene literacy in two ways: pedagogy developed by and for Anthropocene researchers and that advocated by and for science education scholars.

2.2 Pedagogy for Anthropocene Studies

Due to its vast conceptual scope, the Anthropocene has piqued the interest of a wide range of professionals, including climate scientists, geologists, ecologists, historians, philosophers, geologists, anthropologists, artists, museum curators, and more. The Haus der Kulturen der Welt (HKW) in Berlin played a crucial role in providing a gathering space for these diverse stakeholders, collaborating with the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science to develop the Anthropocene Curriculum (AC) initiative. From 2013 to 2022, this initiative generated a wealth of valuable materials for scholars exploring the Anthropocene, which now serves as significant resources for research, teaching, and experiential learning. The AC projects, largely accessible through its comprehensive website, stand as exemplary instances of collaborative efforts among experts from various disciplines leading to the creation of innovative educational programs. By crafting educational materials tailored to different regions and audiences, the AC has laid a robust foundation for discourse on the Anthropocene.

One notable example is the Anthropocene Campus project, which has hosted a series of experimental summer schools offering topical research projects, methods, and field visits for participants. This project has served as a platform for interdisciplinary collaboration and exploration of Anthropocene-related issues (Rosol, 2021). It has proven valuable in demonstrating various pedagogical strategies, such as the concept of “quotidian Anthropocene,” which integrates theoretical and global aspects of the Anthropocene with specific and local environmental challenges (Fortun et al., 2021). However, it should be noted that while these programs offer valuable insights and engagement opportunities, they may not be designed for long-term, semester-based educational endeavors. This could pose challenges for students who are less familiar with the Anthropocene concept, potentially hindering their ability to fully engage with the materials. Therefore, there is a need to develop more accessible and structured educational resources that cater to students at various levels of familiarity with the Anthropocene.

2.3 Pedagogy for Science Education

The field of science education has also recognized the potential of the Anthropocene concept in equipping students with a critical understanding of the uncertain and precarious conditions of the twenty-first century (Gilbert, 2016; Jeong et al., 2021). Gilbert, for instance, asserts that “[if] we have moved into the post-normal, post- carbon, Anthropocene era, and modernity’s key concepts no longer apply, then it seems we need to think again about the meaning of “education” and “society”, and, following from this, the meaning (and purpose) of traditional school subjects, including science” (Gilbert, 2016, p. 192). Drawing on the scholarship of futures literacy, he seeks strategies for anticipating a range of possible futures, that is, the strategies that enable us to revisit and release “unconscious assumptions” in science education and “see the system—in all its complexity—in new ways” (Gilbert, 2016, p. 197). Furthermore, there have been attempts to integrate issues such as colonialism, capitalism, non-human agency, and planetary crises into science education (Wallace et al., 2022; Murris & Somerville, 2021; Salonen et al., 2023).

In a similar vein, the novel aspect of the Anthropocene has found its way into teaching sustainability and other environmental issues, as illustrated by the efforts of Canadian Geographic Education. With the premise that “geographically literate students are better prepared to face global challenges and have the skills necessary to become effective change agents,” this organization offers educational toolkits and programs for the Anthropocene, frequently with new immersive technologies (Canadian Geographic Education, 2019).

It is indeed challenging to develop new curricula centered solely on the concept of the Anthropocene, particularly within existing educational frameworks (Mychajliw et al., 2015). In many cases, the Anthropocene is integrated into existing curricula or adopted as a component of broader discussions on related topics. This can make it difficult for individual instructors to incorporate the concept effectively into their courses. In South Korea, for example, the direct mention of the Anthropocene in academic curricula is relatively rare. To address this gap and support the development of courses that incorporate diverse discussions on the Anthropocene, we propose the concept of Anthropocene literacy and accompanying materials. Anthropocene literacy refers to the capacity to understand the core ideas of the Anthropocene from a multidisciplinary perspective and to navigate the diverse existential challenges presented by this human epoch. By providing educators with resources and materials that explore the Anthropocene from various angles, we aim to facilitate the integration of Anthropocene-related content into a wide range of courses and educational settings. These materials can serve as valuable tools for instructors seeking to introduce their students to the concept of the Anthropocene and its implications.

3 Goals and Components of Anthropocene Literacy

The concept of Anthropocene literacy that we propose aims to emphasize the multifaceted nature of knowledge production within the framework of existing educational objectives. We have decided to employ the term “literacy” because it encompasses more than knowledge acquisition; it also embodies the capacity to act based on acquired knowledge. While literacy traditionally refers to the ability to read and write, it extends to proficiency in specific domains and the ability to critically engage with information, applying it to individual or societal actions. This perspective aligns with definitions of science literacy provided by organizations such as the OECD and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). The OECD (2017) defines scientific literacy as the ability to grapple with science-related issues and understand scientific concepts as a reflective citizen. Similarly, the NASEM emphasizes that science literacy involves not only knowledge of scientific content but also an understanding of scientific practices and an awareness of science as a social process (Snow & Dibner, 2016). In the context of the Anthropocene, literacy extends beyond simply understanding the concept; it encompasses the ability to critically evaluate the implications of human activities on the Earth system and make informed decisions regarding the challenges posed by the Anthropocene. By promoting Anthropocene literacy, we seek to empower individuals to actively engage with the complexities of this epoch and contribute meaningfully to efforts aimed at mitigating its impacts.

Definitions of literacy also evolve in response to changing sociopolitical and environmental circumstances. For instance, in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, science literacy has assumed a critical role in discerning misinformation (Schneegans & Nair-Bedouelle, 2021). In the Asia and Pacific region, where communities are grappling with the impacts of climate change, UNESCO has initiated a global citizen education project focused on “climate science literacy” (UNESCO, 2022). The field of environmental studies has also introduced such concepts as environmental literacy, ecological literacy, and eco-literacy, taking a critical stance on science education for its perceived failure to address social and economic issues. These concepts provide an opportunity to comprehend environmentally responsible behaviors as integral components of science literacy (McBride et al., 2013). It is also found that science literacy, environmental literacy, and other literacy concepts have widely applied the Anthropocene concept to broaden the scope of literacy and its importance (Ghilardi-Lopes et al., 2019; Murris & Somerville, 2021).

Our motivation to foster Anthropocene literacy is two-fold: first, to underscore the planetary scale of challenges facing our damaged Earth, and second, to understand the process of making scientific knowledge through controversies. By integrating these two aspects, Anthropocene literacy becomes an integrative concept that provides a lens through which to interpret our predicaments and bridges diverse disciplinary perspectives. We posit that Anthropocene literacy comprises three key elements:

  1. 1.

    Understanding the nature of science: The Anthropocene exemplifies a contested scientific concept, offering insight into the evolution and debate of scientific ideas. Exploring the processes involved in determining the starting point of the Anthropocene and the ongoing discussions among scholars provides an opportunity to observe the nature of science in action. By examining various aspects of scientific inquiry through the lens of the Anthropocene, students can deepen their understanding of how scientific knowledge is formed and assessed.

  2. 2.

    Embracing a multidisciplinary approach: Anthropocene literacy entails recognizing and appreciating the coexistence of diverse disciplinary approaches to studying and addressing the challenges of the Anthropocene, while also acknowledging the importance of geological evidence. Understanding the multiple scales and systems involved in human activity and its impact on the Earth allows students to cultivate the skills necessary to collaborate effectively with individuals from various disciplines, both within STEM fields and beyond.

  3. 3.

    Understanding the human impact on the Earth: Anthropocene literacy encourages students to explore the wide-ranging effects of human activity on the Earth. This aspect directly aligns with the overarching goal of the Anthropocene, which is to underscore the significant impact of human actions on the planet. Achieving this goal requires integrating insights from the first two aspects of Anthropocene literacy to develop a comprehensive understanding of the complex interactions between human societies and the Earth’s system.

Achieving the goals of Anthropocene literacy cannot be accomplished solely by teaching factual information about the Anthropocene, such as its definition and the identification of its “golden spike” that marks the beginning of it. Instead, these goals require engaging students in discussions and explorations of the broader discourse surrounding the Anthropocene. To effectively develop Anthropocene literacy, it is essential to incorporate a diverse set of teaching methods and approaches. By utilizing the following set of tentative course contents as a framework, instructors can create dynamic learning experiences that encourage critical thinking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the exploration of complex issues related to the Anthropocene. Furthermore, fostering an open-minded approach to collaboration is crucial, especially for STEM students, to enhance students’ ability to work effectively with individuals from various fields and facilitate the co-creation of new knowledge (Park, 2020).

4 Anthropocene Literacy Course Materials

4.1 Learning About the Nature of Science

The first part of Anthropocene literacy focuses on using the Anthropocene as a means to learn about the nature of science (NOS). NOS encompasses the contextual understanding and real-world practices of science, including scientific methodologies, procedures, and epistemic knowledge (NRC, 2012; OECD, 2017). It provides insight into how science operates and aids in the analysis and evaluation of scientific claims made by researchers and others. NOS is considered a crucial component of science literacy, as it enables individuals to engage critically with scientific information and understand the process of scientific inquiry. However, there are concerns and limitations associated with NOS, such as its tendency to be reduced to a narrow list of descriptive tenets or to only convey idealized norms of science (Allchin, 2011; Clough, 2007; Powers, 2020). Despite these limitations, NOS remains an important area of research in science education, as understanding the nature of science is helpful in the development of a comprehensive understanding of scientific concepts and practices. By utilizing the Anthropocene as a topic to explore NOS, students may gain a deeper appreciation for the complexities and nuances of scientific inquiry and the ways in which scientific knowledge is constructed and evaluated. This approach facilitates a more holistic understanding of the Anthropocene and its implications for our world.

Indeed, ample stories from the Anthropocene debates can be discussed to illuminate aspects of NOS—the stories about scientific communities, vignettes, instruments, argumentations, metaphors, and so on, all of which can be employed as effective teaching tools (McComas, 2008; Nouri & McComas, 2021). The historical tracing of the concept through controversies provides insights into the development of scientific ideas, methodologies, and paradigms, thereby serving as an effective means to learn about the nature of science. Students who are already familiar with NOS may benefit from observing the almost real-time dynamics of knowledge production.

As illustrated in Table 2, a set of specific debates can be presented in the form of questions that are effective in creating an atmosphere of active engagement and critical thinking (Clough, 2011). In the first place, investigating the process by which scientific consensus is built within the geological community will attract students’ attention to not just how but also to when and why voting is conducted to settle controversial matters. Scientists rarely construct scientific knowledge by voting. However, as illustrated by the International Astronomical Union’s 2006 decision on demoting the status of Pluto from the ninth planet within the solar system to one of five dwarf planets (Hogeback, 2016), voting is sometimes introduced in high-profile cases. This will lead to a philosophical discussion about the nature of scientific knowledge: whether it is solely about constructing a description or explanation of the universe, or if it can also include ways of making sense of observations. Additionally, exploring a variety of evidence, such as statistical evidence, computer modeling, and geological location, underscores the rigorous scientific debate involved in establishing a new geological era (e.g., Waters & Turner, 2022). In particular, the discussion of the starting point of the Anthropocene is interesting: whereas Paul Crutzen suggested the Industrial Revolution as its beginning (Steffen et al., 2011), the AWG pointed to the stratigraphic evidence of radioactive isotopes from atomic bombs that can be found around the globe. Moreover, the ongoing debate over whether the Anthropocene is a geological event or a geological epoch is a good example of how scientists can interpret the same evidence differently (e.g., Gibbard et al., 2022a, 2022b; Head et al., 2023a, 2023b). Each discussion illustrates how the scientific community operates. By exploring these materials, students are able to grasp the basic facts and information of the Anthropocene. They can also learn that the entire process of discussing the Anthropocene culminates in voting, indicating that scientific evolution involves not only knowledge itself but the procedural aspects of knowledge production. By examining why the Anthropocene has been studied in multiple disciplines, and how new alliances are forged and challenged, enables students to understand the benefits and difficulties of conducting projects that go beyond a single knowledge domain. Encouraging students to search for and explore suggested reference materials on their own facilitates independent inquiry and promotes a deeper understanding of scientific concepts.

Table 2 List of questions and sources for NOS discussion
Full size table

4.2 Learning About a Multidisciplinary Approach

The second goal of Anthropocene literacy relates to its multidisciplinary approach, a characteristic for which the Anthropocene is renowned. As previously mentioned, the Anthropocene, as a concept capturing the current changes in Earth’s systems, requires the integration of knowledge from diverse disciplines to comprehend the functioning and alterations of such systems. Given its designation of humans as the primary agents of Earth’s history, understanding human actions is crucial. This multidisciplinary perspective can be found in the composition of the Anthropocene Working Group, which includes not only geologists but also archaeologists, paleontologists, climate and atmospheric scientists, as well as experts in other scientific fields, history, and international law (Zalasiewicz et al., 2017). Moreover, this multidisciplinary approach extends beyond the group’s membership, as evidenced by journals focusing on the Anthropocene that emphasize interdisciplinary or even transdisciplinary work. In essence, the Anthropocene is considered a “bridge” between disciplines (Brondizio et al., 2016; Nature Editorial, 2011), a unique feature not typically found in other scientific concepts.

The complexity and uncertainty surrounding the Anthropocene have drawn significant attention, allowing scholars from various fields to engage with it and spark new discussions. A book emphasizing the importance of the multidisciplinary nature of the Anthropocene succinctly summarizes its significance: “If our approach to the Anthropocene is structured only around scientific findings and technological options, it will be inadequate. So too will any response to the Anthropocene that is purely cultural without being rooted in scientific understanding” (Thomas et al., 2020). It can be argued that several disciplines have evolved around the concept of the Anthropocene, each relying on the others (Toivanen et al., 2017).

The importance of multidisciplinary approaches has been widely discussed in science education (NRC, 2012), and implementing a holistic view and meaningful associations across various subjects has been suggested as a new science education method (NGSS, 2013). With the Anthropocene concept, a multidisciplinary approach among the sciences can be promoted. However, the approach we are proposing extends beyond the sciences to include the humanities and social sciences. We embrace attempts to rethink humanities and social science education to incorporate the perspective of the Anthropocene (McGregor et al., 2021).

The list of tentative discussion points suggested in Table 3 has no designated answers, and some discussions are still ongoing. By considering diverse aspects of the Anthropocene, we expect STEM students to learn how to broaden their understanding of science in context. In particular, discussions on the definition of the Anthropocene are fruitful and can expand its meaning for students. While discussions in the nature of science have focused on scientific evidence, other perspectives raise questions about “Anthropos” and the power driving this widespread change. These questions may also stimulate discussions on the disparities between Global South and Global North and further on postcolonialism and neoliberalism.

Table 3 List of questions and sources for discussions
Full size table

Another well-discussed topic is the debate on Anthropocene vs. Capitalocene (Moore, 2017). This discussion is important for considering the source of the current predicament of the Anthropocene. Other terms have also been suggested, such as “Plantationocene” and “Chthulucene” (Davis et al., 2019; Haraway, 2015). The terms proposed by these scholars are helpful in broadening students’ perspectives by showing elements (economic, non-human) that have not been addressed fully in existing scientific discourse. While not all students need to fully understand or engage with these discussions, imagining alternative terms for this geological era can be helpful.

Further expanding on this discussion, it is evident that the Anthropocene carries a significant cultural imperative, inspiring numerous documentaries and artworks. As the concept emphasizes the need to change humanity’s conventional worldview, many artworks have been produced to imagine disasters and crises at the planetary scale (Hudson Hill, 2020; Page, 2020). These artistic endeavors can encourage students to establish a personal connection with Anthropocene changes. Moreover, museums can play a significant role in showcasing the Anthropocene through special exhibitions. Both natural science museums and art museums have featured the Anthropocene as a prominent theme in exhibitions over the past few years (Isager et al., 2021). The availability of diverse source materials presents a valuable opportunity for exploration.

Overall, adopting a multidisciplinary approach allows students to transcend internal scientific discussions and consider other social factors such as ethics, sustainability, politics, and culture. This perspective aligns with the context of Socio-Scientific Issues (Wong et al., 2011). By considering the multidisciplinary nature of contemporary issues, students can uncover new research topics related to the Anthropocene (Thomas et al., 2020).

4.3 Learning About the Human Impact on the Earth

Understanding the nature of science and adopting a multidisciplinary approach can facilitate the analysis of human agency, whose impacts are found across temporal, spatial, social, and economic domains (Chakrabarty, 2019; Hecht, 2018; Thomas et al., 2020). The Anthropocene as a multi-scalar crisis is undoubtedly a key element of Anthropocene knowledge (Rosol, 2021). Rather than viewing the Anthropocene as a single “global” problem, it is important to consider it alongside various local contexts to examine regional disparities and inequalities that have created the conditions for the Anthropocene (Biermann et al., 2016).

We suggest implementing the Engaged Learning (EL) model for this purpose. EL involves active and intentional participation in their own learning, fostering ongoing, lifelong engagement. Given the complexity of the Anthropocene predicament, it needs to be considered within long-term relationships and linked to individual actions for planetary situations. Problem-based learning, commonly used to tackle complex concepts such as sustainability, could be employed here (Brundiers & Wiek, 2013; McGibbon & Van Belle, 2015). In this step, students should concentrate on identifying problems and discussing potential solutions. They are encouraged to reflect on their own local problems across different scales. Not seeking a simple solution is important; the primary objective is to analyze and understand the root of the problem, taking into consideration various actors and scales. Employing the method proposed in the quotidian Anthropocene case, i.e., listing issues from the micro-level to the geological level, can be beneficial (Fortun et al., 2021).

Yet identifying specific local problems and linking them to global issues may be challenging. To deal with this scale problem, Hecht introduces the concept of the “inter-scalar vehicle” (Hecht, 2018). This concept explains how environmental problems in the uranium mining sites in Africa are intertwined with political and economic factors connected with other parts of the world. Hecht traces uranium as an inter-scalar vehicle from its extraction from Earth to its transportation to other countries, demonstrating how structural violence perpetuates disasters in local contexts. Contemporary disasters are often intricate and defy attribution to a single source. The Anthropocene concept can help elucidate why certain types of disasters unfold gradually without a distinct event and how they result from what appears to be ordinary economic, industrial, or political activities by humans.

5 Conclusion

Even after the Anthropocene Working Group’s proposal to codify the Anthropocene as a geological time unit was formally rejected in March 2024, there has been no sign of heated debates cooling down. As a reporter for Science has aptly put it—“The Anthropocene is dead. Long live the Anthropocene”—it seems that a new stage of high-profile battle has just begun (Voosen, 2024, para 1). On the one hand, the leaders of the AWG are determined to press for formal geological recognition, exhibiting unfaltering confidence in the legitimacy of their evidence from the sedimentary strata, which are small in size but distinct. Most importantly, as Collin N. Waters, head of the AWG, has stressed, the “Earth system changes that mark the Anthropocene are collectively irreversible” (Voosen, 2024, para 11). On the other hand, the upper echelons of the geological community appear to breathe a sigh of relief. Stanley Finney, head of the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), who has been critical of the AWG from the start, says, “It would have been rejected 10 years earlier if they had not avoided presenting it to the stratigraphic community for careful consideration” (Voosen, 2024, para 8). Some opponents of the Anthropocene as a formal geological epoch also welcome the decision as a triumph for those who have viewed it as an informal geological event. A reporter for Nature has also covered a variety of responses to the decision. For instance, Jacquelyn Gill, a palaeoecologist, points out: “It’s a term that belongs to everyone. To people working in philosophy and literary criticism, in the arts, in the humanities, [in] the sciences.... I think it’s far more meaningful in the way that it is currently being used, than in any attempts that stratigraphers could have made to restrict or define it in some narrow sense” (Adam, 2024, para 8).

This is the status of the complicated, ongoing debate. The latest decision is unlikely to bring closure to it. The Anthropocene will continue to be utilized as a scientific, quasi-scientific, or non-scientific concept. One might be tempted to recall Max Planck’s remark in his autobiography about the initial resistance to his concept of quantum: “a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it” (Kuhn, 1996, p. 151). However, an important distinction between the case of quantum theory and that of the Anthropocene concept is that the latter involves constituencies much broader than a single scientific discipline. The decision by the IUGS has never intended to deny the significant impact humans have had on the Earth.

We think it is time to explore more of the Anthropocene from the perspective of multiple disciplines, beginning with teaching STEM students in the classroom. This includes delving into all the debates, uncertainties, excitements, and frustrations. By doing so, students can experience “science in the making” (within the realm of science) and “science in action” (beyond science). This paper has proposed ways to utilize the concept of the Anthropocene, not only as a case within existing education programs but also as the focal point of an independent course.

Anthropocene literacy, designed for university-level courses, equips students with tools and discussion questions rather than predefined answers to navigate an array of complex topics. The specific contents suggested in this paper can be tailored based on the context of the program. The Anthropocene debate has sparked potential ways of integrating STEM, social sciences, and humanities, emphasizing that future planetary crises cannot be addressed by a single discipline alone but require multiple engagements. By enhancing Anthropocene literacy, students can learn how to understand and approach other complex disasters with a more comprehensive perspective.