Education Increases Solar Radiation Modification Literacy but Reinforces Caution: Evidence from a Pre–Post University Study

Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) is increasingly discussed as a potential supplement to climate-change mitigation, yet public and stakeholder judgments remain sensitive to knowledge, framing, and perceived risks. We examined how a structured university classroom module on SRM reshaped student perceptions using a matched pre–post survey design. Participants were students enrolled in an English-taught global climate change course (N = 106); 103 students provided valid matched responses after applying pre-specified exclusion rules. Self-rated SRM knowledge increased substantially after the module (mean change +0.47 on a 1–3 scale; Wilcoxon signed-rank p (Holm-adjusted) < 1 × 10 −7 ; Cohen’s dz = 0.67). Support for SRM research remained moderately positive but did not increase (pre mean 3.76 to post mean 3.54 on a 1–5 scale). In contrast, support for stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) deployment declined (pre mean 3.42 to post mean 2.95; p (Holm-adjusted) = 0.0084; dz = −0.33), and preferences shifted away from prioritizing climate intervention toward low-carbon development (mean change −0.68 on a 1–5 priority scale; p (Holm-adjusted) = 0.0001; dz = −0.45). Post-lecture models indicated that perceived benefits versus risks was the most consistent correlate of support across outcomes. Open-ended responses most frequently emphasized feasibility, unintended consequences, governance, and moral hazard. Overall, students largely endorsed SRM research as valuable while becoming more cautious about deployment and political prioritization, suggesting that balanced, structured instruction can sharpen sensitivity to evidence, uncertainty, and potential trade-offs that students also weighed in the survey.