The Education Blog

How has the teaching of science in schools changed over the decades?

Much research has been conducted into students’ learning of the sciences, with the main challenges to learning considered to be preconceptions, knowledge organisation and metacognition (thinking about thinking). Much change in educational approach to the sciences has been informed by research into these areas and the development of methods that assist students in gaining skills in these areas.

Although originally introduced as a linear course, A-levels were changed in 2000 such that the natural sciences now consist of six modules that are examined individually. Science GCSEs were also changed in 2006, so that students receive separate grades for each subject and can choose one of two electives, focusing on academics and vocational elements, respectively. The GCSE option ’21st Century Science’ was also introduced, to inspire students to become more engaged with science.

Secondary education in science is not the only target of improvement, in 2010, the Royal Society issued their “State of the Nation” report, which gave the worrying information that no more than 5% of primary school teachers had a significant background in science or mathematics. As such the Royal Society is advocating for a science ‘specialist’ teacher to be available in every school.

Is teaching as effective now as it was before? Has it improved?

There is much emphasis on attracting the best teachers to science and maths, with up to £20,000 bursaries for maths, physics and chemistry student teachers announced by the government this year.

On average, A-level results for all subjects have consistently improved over the last two and a half decades, but whether this is due to improved teaching methods or grade inflation is the focus of much debate.

There have been calls for those students who show an aptitude for science to be enrolled for Triple Science at GCSE automatically, as those with such aptitude often do not choose to take up the option.

Are the sciences still popular in schools or are fewer people taking science subjects now?

With over 40 percent of employers reporting that they are finding it difficult to recruit employees with sufficient skills in science, technology, engineering and maths, it is no wonder that students are being encouraged to study the sciences. This approach appears to be paying off, with 40 percent more students taking maths at A-level and 20 percent more studying physics and chemistry than five years ago – all while A-level student numbers have only increased by 7.7 percent. However, this only brings physics back to the level it was at in 2002, according to the Campaign for Science & Engineering in the UK.

The difference between the number of boys and girls studying science at schools has increased, despite more girls taking science at A-level, however, girls are more likely to achieve the highest grades. The type of school attended also makes a difference, with students at comprehensives much less likely to study the sciences at A-level.

Guest post from Robert, a freelance blogger and former teacher now working on a science park in Oxford.

A recent assessment by Bromsgrove School on the subject of the IB versus A levels got me thinking. How do other countries manage their education systems? Various surveys and statistical analyses can shed light on the UK’s education system and its ranking by comparison to other countries.

Literacy is perhaps the most important measure of an education system. Without the ability to read and write, all other education will be difficult, to say the least. The Literacy rate in the UK is estimated to be at 99%, putting the country at the same level as the United States and many European countries. However, the method of estimating literacy rates varies from country to country, so the results cannot be taken as rock solid. In fact, in 2003, 56% of the UK’s adult working population had a literacy level that would not have allowed them to get a good pass at GCSE Level. The OECD put the UK at 14th in their league tables that year. The levels of literacy were up to three times worse than Scandinavian countries.

The UK is a member of the OECD (organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) – an organisation of countries that are committed to democracy and market economy. Each year the OECD releases a report on the maths, reading and science proficiency levels of countries, which this year covered 65 different countries. The news isn’t great for the UK. In 2006, the UK was ranked at 14th, 17th and 24th in science, reading and maths, whereas in 2010 it had slipped to 16th, 25th and 28th. The UK is below the US in reading proficiency, Slovenia in maths and Germany in science. South Korea and Finland have done the best, with South Korea taking the top spot in reading and maths and coming in 3rd in Science, while Finland topped the science rankings and came 2nd in maths and reading.

As of 2010, the UK is also no longer a world leader in the production of graduates. An OECD study that measures the percentage of people who get a university degree found that the UK has slipped from being in the top 4 ten years ago, when the numbers were nine points above the OECD average to 15th today, at 3 points below the average. Much of this seems to be an inability to improve as opposed to a drop in achievement. The UK percentage dropped only 2 points, from 37% to 35%, but the OECD average increased from 28% to 38%.

However, the UK higher education system is still seen as reputable, with the UK beaten only by the US in the 2010 Times Higher Education ranking of universities by reputation. The UK boasted 12 universities in the top 100, with the US having an impressive 45. Harvard took the top spot, but Oxford and Cambridge were both in the top ten. The UK had a further four universities in the top 50, including Edinburgh University and University College London. There is some concern amongst academics and students that the recent funding cuts and increase in tuition fees will adversely affect both the number of graduates and the rankings of UK universities internationally.

With so much focus on the employment sector in light of the recent economic problems, the nature of our children’s education is continually being questioned. For years a system has been in place which prioritises certain subjects above others, but should this system be altered? And should some subjects be made compulsory up to an older age?

As a general rule the ‘core’ subjects of English (Literature and Language), Mathematics and Science are compulsory up until the age of 16 (until G.C.S.E qualifications).  These subjects have long been considered necessary for building a firm educational foundation intended to benefit children later in life, but is this really the case?

The truth is that it is now generally compulsory for a modern foreign language to be studied to the same level, and whilst it is not compulsory to take physical education as an assessed subject for these examinations it remains a compulsory element of school education. The intention of these latter two examples is to provide two very specific skills. A useful edge in today’s competitive and internationally involved business world (through the knowledge of a modern foreign language) and to ensure physical fitness and well being (through physical education).

These added requirements are generally enforced by both public and private schools alike, intending to help equip students with the necessary skills in order to perform well within the business market of the UK. However, a number of questions have been raised as to whether these subjects should be made compulsory to an even older age.

The intention of this is to help improve the state of the economy by ensuring that students and employers have the best skills possible. The arguments for and against this idea vary in opinion. Some think that these subjects should be favoured whilst others think that more practical subjects could be embraced in order to increase the prevalence of certain, more specific, skills within the market.

The benefits of the compulsory studies of English and other languages are said to be plentiful. The ability to engage in varied communication and interaction in order to establish strong working relationships and promote business is seen as a key skill. The latter part of this statement is especially important given the multi-cultural nature of today’s society and the increased prevalence of international business links.

Mathematics and Science, however, give students a basic understanding of simple functions and are especially valuable within more practical employment fields. Mathematics, in particular, is viewed as an essential skill within all aspects of business and employment.

The disadvantages of making these subjects compulsory to a higher age bracket is the idea that it would stifle the creativity and personality of students, forcing them to study subjects which they may not be comfortable with. This idea has seen an increase in the amount of schools which specialise in other areas, such as sports schools, which aim to increase the options available to children rather than restricting them to study the core subjects.

It is a debate which has raged for a number of years, but there is still a discussion over whether single sex or co-ed schools offer a better experience. The arguments usually centre on academic achievement versus social implications. Establishing which type of school is the best is heavily dependent on who is judging.

The truth is that there are a number of great single sex and co-education schools available across the country. Both types tend to experience similar results at the top of the league tables for both comprehensive, independent and grammar schools. This means that there is generally not a great deal to choose between them.

Independent co-ed schools such as Bromsgrove and the City of London Freemen’s School feature in the top rankings alongside single sex establishments such as the Perse School for Girls and Westminster School, each achieving strong results year on year.

The argument over which type of school is better can therefore not necessarily be determined by academic achievement alone, and must look at social ramifications as well.

Co-Ed Schools

Co-ed schools are often considered superior because they provide a more rounded social experience. This is because the culture and society of today’s world is not segregated. This means that those who attend single sex schools can occasionally find it difficult to integrate into mixed sex establishments and places of employment later in life.

Co-ed schools are thought to increase a pupil’s ability to communicate with their peers in a more varied and relaxed manner, something which can be seen as a huge advantage. Co-ed schools also help to make education more rounded and diverse by ensuring that there are a variety of opinions expressed by different pupils. This is because children of both sexes will often have very different opinions to one another. By teaching them in the same establishment, schools are ensuring that all pupils have the benefit of listening to a range of their peers.

Single Sex Schools

The argument for single sex schools is that they lessen distractions within the classroom and therefore increase the educational and academic achievements within the school. While it is certainly the case that single sex schools feature heavily within the school league tables – for comprehensive, grammar and independent schools – this is not to suggest that co-ed schools are not represented at all.

Single sex schools are often criticised for restricting the social growth and interaction of their pupils by limiting their contact with their peers to those of the same sex as themselves. This is often considered a drawback to single sex education because it means that children are potentially put at a disadvantage when it comes to public interaction. Single sex schools, whilst achieving good results, do not have a marked dominance over the school league tables. This means that many feel that they do not have adequate benefits to compensate for their disadvantages. Co-ed schools are therefore often considered to be the preferred choice as they offer academic and social growth/development.

All students are taught certain facts about a certain subject or area, but is there education broad enough? Are students given a thorough knowledge of a topic or are they simply taught how to pass an exam?

*

There has been much debate over this topic over recent years, with an increasing number of people suggesting that an education does not fully equip students with adequate knowledge to flourish in life. This is because more importance is placed on examination results than anything else. This in turn leads to people feeling that students are only being taught what is necessary to achieve good results, but is this really the case?