Tag Archives: The Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Impact Project

Talk with us…about partnerships

Leave a comment

The Sciences 3-18 impact report contains a range of examples of how working with partners to provide well planned learning experiences can enhance the learning and teaching and impact positively on outcomes for children and young people.

Have you worked with a local business, employer, industry, further or higher education or another partner to enhance learning and teaching in the sciences? Why not use the blog to share this with other practitioners?

“Building the Curriculum 3 (2008) defines the curriculum as the ‘totality of experiences which are planned for children and young people throughout their education, wherever they are being educated’. These experiences can be planned across the following aspects: the ethos and life of the school, curriculum areas and subjects, interdisciplinary learning, and opportunities for personal achievement. Although an improving picture, there is scope for more secondary science teachers to plan learning which takes more account of aspects such as the ethos and life of the school and offers more opportunities for personal achievement.

Increasingly, staff are recognising the significance of planning learning in the sciences which takes account of each of these four aspects of the curriculum. Many schools are providing a range of opportunities for children and young people to develop relevant sciences knowledge and skills outwith the timetabled curriculum. This is particularly notable in the many examples of eco work undertaken in schools across all sectors. Eco work in schools engages children and young people in key issues, including the environment, sustainability, global citizenship and the value of a low carbon future. Over 3700 schools in Scotland are currently registered with the Eco-Schools Scotland programme.

Secondary schools organise relevant work experience placements for young people and promote participation in science-based events and challenges such as Go4Set and Opito’s Petrochallenge.”

Some good practice examples from the report:

Good Practice Example 15

One school has been given a substantial area of land by a local business to maintain, develop and use as an ‘outdoor classroom’. This provides a relevant context for learning. Teachers can take classes to this outdoor area and develop young people’s knowledge and skills as they study areas of the sciences such as biodiversity and sustainability. Young people’s skills are developing through using sampling techniques, making various measurements, recording, presenting and analysing data. They develop team working skills as they contribute ideas for improving the land and work together to carry out practical work such as planting trees.

Good Practice Example 20

One primary school engaged children very well with their local environment through partnership with the Galloway Fisheries Trust in the ‘Clyde in the Classroom’ project. Children reared trout fry in a classroom hatchery before releasing them into the local river. Children’s knowledge of lifecycles and the basic needs of living things were developed as they cared for the trout fry. Working on the project provided a context for developing numeracy and literacy skills, for example through creative writing tasks and activities such as estimating and measuring the length of the developing fry. It also helped the children to understand the geography of their local river network and provided a relevant context for learning about the effect of our actions on an ecosystem.

 

Talk with us…about assessment

Leave a comment

The Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Area Impact Project report has much to consider around the issue of assessment. Within the report are many examples of good practice in which quality assessment is a feature, and which exemplifying the range of assessment approaches and appropriate evidence across all sectors.

Good Practice Examples 10, 11, 17, 29, 30, 31

The report summarises the national picture as follows:

“Although progress is being made towards developing a range of approaches to assessment, there is much scope for improvement in this area across all sectors. The focus in most primary schools has been on developing programmes and assessment approaches for literacy, numeracy and health and wellbeing. At this stage, most staff are not yet assessing, recording or tracking children’s progress in the sciences in a systematic way. Primary and secondary schools are not yet at the stage where they can provide sufficient evidence of learners’ achievement in the sciences in the broad general education phase. In secondary schools, assessment is still largely of a summative nature and does not reflect progress across the range of experiences and outcomes. In primary and secondary sectors, there is some way to go to ensure that assessment is truly part of learning and teaching and informs learning and next steps.”

How are you developing your understanding of approaches to assessment in your local context? How are you using professional dialogue and moderation to share understanding of what achievement of a level looks like? How are your assessment approaches designed to assess breath, challenge and application?

Education Scotland, in conjunction with SQA, has recently published Making Good Assessment Decisions 3-18  as part of the Education Scotland Sharing Standards and Expectations resource. Further support resources to exemplify these resources are in development.

 

Talk with us…about using the Concept Development in conjunction with Es and Os

Leave a comment

Within the report, the Concept Development in the sciences (2009) paper was highlighted in a number of sections:

“too many teachers across all sectors are unaware of the Sciences: Concept development in the sciences (2009) paper which should be used in tandem with the sciences experiences and outcomes (2009)”; 

“too many staff from across all sectors are still not aware of the Sciences: Concept development in the sciences (2009) paper and learning consequently lacks depth in a few key areas”;

“there is a need to ensure that learning sequences are well-planned to develop concepts in a coherent way. The Sciences: Concept development in the sciences (2009) paper could be used better as the basis for such planning.”

The Concept Development paper can be used by practitioners to aid understanding of level of complexity and depth of treatment.

Consider two Es and Os:

By investigating floating and sinking of objects in water, I can apply my understanding of buoyancy to solve a practical challenge. SCN 2-08b

Through experimentation, I can explain floating and sinking in terms of the relative densities of different materials. SCN 4-08b

Both talk about “floating and sinking” so how do these differ? What makes one appropriate to second level and the other fourth? The Concept Development paper fleshes this out to illustrate the depth of treatment at second level.

“At second level (SCN 2-08b), experiments on floating and sinking allow learners to identify materials which are lighter (less dense) or heavier (more dense) than water. They can carry out a practical challenge to design, construct and test objects made from more dense materials but which will float.”

Notice also that the fourth level outcome calls for explanation rather than investigation and application, and explanation in terms of relative density which is more challenging conceptually.

Now consider:

I have collaborated in investigations to compare magnetic, electrostatic and gravitational forces and have explored their practical applications. SCN 2-08a

Is this “too hard” for second level?  Is SCN2-08a more difficult than fourth level SCN4-08b because “floating and sinking” sounds easier?

The Concept Development paper again fleshes out depth of treatment and complexity, to illustrate what this looks like at second level, and the purpose of the learning associated with this E&O.

“At first and second levels (SCN 1-08a and SCN 2-08a), playing with magnets introduces learners to forces which can act over a distance and helps them identify magnetic materials (most commonly iron, but also nickel and cobalt) and non-magnetic materials (e.g. aluminium, copper and brass, and all nonmetals).

At second level they develop their understanding of forces by exploring magnetic, electrostatic and gravitational forces as examples of forces which can act over a distance (i.e. the objects do not need to touch). An important distinction for learners is that they recognise that magnetic and electrostatic forces can attract or repel, while gravitational forces always attract. They learn that the force of gravity between two objects is normally only observed when one object has a very large mass e.g. the Earth or the sun.”

STEM Central materials on Rescue Vehicles for second level explore approaches to learning and teaching incorporating SCN2-08b, exemplifying what this can look like in practice in the context of flood rescue. Currently in development, publication is anticipated early in 2013.  

STEM Central in Motion offers ideas around learning and teaching for STEM subjects, and our new STEM Professional Learning Community at bit.ly/stemhome  (Glow login required) offers a place for educators to share, and to access professional learning associated with STEM, using community tools to measure impact.

Planning for the Senior Phase, and articulation with the Broad General Education

Leave a comment

The report section “How are schools planning and delivering the sciences at the senior phase?” identifies that discussions are continuing around the final shape of the curriculum at the senior phase, with teachers accessing the new national qualifications in their own subject areas, and beginning to plan for learning and teaching at the senior phase.

One of the identified aspects for development is

“Secondary schools need to finalise their plans for the senior phase and ensure that learning at the broad general education phase will articulate with their senior phase.”

How are your schools taking forward the planning for the senior phase, with a focus on the articulation with the broad general education? How are you using the seven principles of curriculum design in your planning? The report includes “Designing the Curriculum: a tool for discussion” which explores these seven principles in more detail.

Talk with us…about progression of learning from primary to secondary within the broad general education

Leave a comment

One of the aspects for development identified in the report relates to progression in learning across the broad general education, as children and young people progress from pre-school to primary and primary to secondary. This is discussed further in the section “Designing the Curriculum: a tool for discussion” where issues associated with progression are examined in more detail.

How is your department or school working with others, across sectors, to build effectively on children and young people’s prior experiences to ensure continuity in learning?

Talk with us…about engaging children and young people in the Sciences 3-18 debate

Leave a comment

 

Going well? Could be better? Along with the full report on the Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Area Impact Project, we launched last week a summary for children and young people bit.ly/sciences3-18childrenandyoungpeople . We want to hear from children and young people about their experiences and views around sciences, to help us focus on what we need to do next. Do you have plans to use the summary for children and young people, and the “conversation starters” below to engage your learners, or your own children, in the debate?

Talk with us…about concept development in the sciences

Leave a comment

The Concept Development in the Sciences (2009) is highlighted in the Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Area Impact Project report as guidance to be used in tandem with the sciences experiences and outcomes (2009) to aid in planning for appropriate depth and coherence.

How are you using the Concept Development in the Sciences (2009) paper as part of planning for learning and teaching in your role?

Talk with us…about practical work in the sciences

Leave a comment

As you might expect from an analysis and evaluation of the sciences 3-18 in Scotland, practical work and its role in the sciences is discussed.

 “Young people at S1 and S2 frequently report enjoying practical work which they have experienced in their learning in the sciences…At S1 and S2 young people generally have plenty of opportunity to carry out practical work allowing them to develop a range of practical technique and investigation skills often within relevant and real-life contexts. They often cite this aspect of their learning as one of the main reasons they enjoy science.”

 “Young people at secondary school are developing practical investigation and inquiry skills within a range of relevant and real-life contexts. They can generally work collaboratively to plan fair tests, make a valid hypothesis, collect appropriate evidence, observe, measure accurately, estimate, record results in an appropriate format, interpret and evaluate findings and present them in a way of their choosing. They are often able to link two variables to determine relationships. A strong feature of practical work is young people’s ability to manipulate and name scientific equipment confidently, apply safety measures and take necessary actions to control risk and hazards. Many are not yet skilled at identifying the limitations of practical technique and scientific equipment and suggesting improvements to experimental work or investigation.”

 In the report we have identified some good practice. Examples 13, 19, 24, 27 and 32 illustrate practice taking place in our pre-school centres and schools, and are particularly relevant to this discussion.

What are your experiences of practical work in the sciences? Whether you are a child, young person, practitioner or parents, join in the discussion!

Talk with us…about gender imbalance in subject choices in the senior phase

Leave a comment

“In some secondary schools, there have been clear gender differences regarding the uptake of physics and biology. For example in some schools, biology is predominantly studied by girls at national qualification stages and physics by boys. This is also reflected in national figures (see Appendix 4). In some schools, this has not been a notable feature. Some schools, having recognised this as an issue, had taken proactive measures such as promoting the Women into Science programme. Others have been unaware of this issue despite comprehensive examination analysis. A few schools have recognised this as an issue but have as yet taken no positive action to address this, with no relevant priorities appearing on their improvement plan.”

“In the last decade, physics courses by S4 have been taken consistently by a higher proportion of boys. Although the proportion of boys studying biology courses by S4 over the last decade has been increasing, there has been a notably higher proportion of girls taking these courses. There is no notable gender difference with chemistry and science.”

 

“A consistently higher proportion of boys have taken Higher physics over the past decade. Although the gender balance in Higher biology and Higher human biology is improving, a notably higher proportion of girls have consistently taken these subjects over the last decade. Chemistry shows no such gender difference.”

 

As identified in the report, this gender imbalance is not notable in all schools.

Some questions for consideration and discussion:

Does this gender imbalance in subject choice exist in your school?

Has your school been proactive in seeking to address this? Has there been measurable impact as a result of your actions?

It would be particularly interesting to hear from young people and parents around this issue.

Talking with us about Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Area Impact Project report at SLF 2012

6 Comments

Yesterday saw the launch of the The Sciences 3-18 Curriculum Area Impact Project report in a lively and challenging session at SLF 2012. We were delighted to welcome to the session practitioners, partners, young people and parents as we shared the key messages from the report, and our strategies for taking this forward. Delegates were enthusiastic in joining the debate around the key strengths and aspects for development, talking together and reflecting on the extent to which

  • these were concordant with their expectations
  • there were any surprises in these
  • these apply in their local context.

Delegates were challenged to address the question:

What can you do in your role to

  • address the aspects for development
  • share the message with the report
  • engage with the debate

and to plan next steps.

We have posted the shared outcomes of the discussions at SLF2012, in the comments, which we hope will inspire you to blog and comment too!