Junior College Utrecht: A New Model to challenge Talented Secondary School
Students to Study Science
Ton van der Valk, Centre for Science and Mathematics Education, Universiteit Utrecht, The
Netherlands, a.e.vandervalk@phys.uu.nl
Ed van den Berg, AMSTEL Instituut, Universiteit van Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
eberg@science.uva.nl
Abstract
The Junior College Utrecht (JCU), a joint initiative of Universiteit Utrecht and 26
secondary schools from the Utrecht region, was established in 2004. It has a dual
purpose:
 to offer a challenging science education to talented students from partner
schools (grade 11 and 12)
 to create a laboratory for innovation of the science curricula and science
teaching to the science sections of the JCU partner schools
Talented and science-motivated students are selected from the partner schools. During
two years, they follow the JCU curriculum for mathematics, physics, chemistry and
biology for two days a week at the University Campus. The remaining three days
students take non-science subjects at the partner schools. During the 2005/06 school year,
the JCU had 23 grade 12 students and 48 grade 11 students.
The JCU curriculum has the following characteristics:
 accelerated: topics from Dutch curriculum are taught at an accelerated pace;
 comprehensive: topics are taught in-depth e.g. by using university laboratories
and guest lectures by scientists;
 enriched: including challenging topics that go beyond the Dutch curriculum;
 coherence of the sciences: focus on an interdisciplinary approach.
At the JCU, example modules (e.g. nano-science) for national science curriculum reform
are developed and implemented. Teachers from the partner schools can visit the lessons
and can participate in adapting these modules to their schools. In that way, the JCU is a
model for the partner schools for school curriculum development an implementation.
Introduction
Many countries, like the USA, the Philippines and Australia, have run special programs for
talented science students for decades including special science high schools (see e.g. Ngoi and
Vondracek 2004; Watter and Dietzmann 2003). In the Netherlands such programs are very recent
and so far only one specialized science enriched secondary school, the Junior College Utrecht
(JCU), was established in 2004. The JCU has a model that is unique in several respects. We will
explain in this paper the institutional, educational, curriculum and outreach aspects of the model.
In 2003, Utrecht University decided to start special science education for gifted secondary
students with a science and technology orientation. For this, the University started cooperating
1
with secondary schools from the Utrecht region (JCU partner schools) to offer a joint program..
This project has a dual purpose:
 to offer a challenging science education to talented students from partner
schools (grade 11 and 12)
 to create a laboratory for innovation of the science curricula and science
teaching to the science sections of the JCU partner schools
Schools have joined the network because they cannot really offer their top students sufficient
challenge. Many top students get bored in high school and some may seriously underachieve
(Peterson and Colangelo 1996). Schools are also interested in this education laboratory function
and in closer contacts with the University.
Utrecht University likes to enhance the attractiveness and public image of science and technology
and create a special and motivating educational environment. Moreover, the University has
started a policy of paying attention to top talent. Some time ago, it has started University College
Utrecht (UCU, see www.ucu.uu.nl), a for the Netherlands unique, broad, residential
undergraduate program for talented students who live and study together and take a broad range
of courses in a very interactive and active learning environment. Junior College Utrecht is a
logical extension of this towards the secondary school level. JCU is located at the UCU campus.
The JCU institutional model
JCU is a joint institution of Utrecht University and the 26 partner schools. In fact, this is a
specific elaboration of school strategy 12 (“cluster groups – cooperation between schools in a
region to provide a central facility and specialist”) out of 14 that Watter and Dietzmann (2003)
have listed. Its administrative board consists of representatives from the University and from
partner schools.
The partner schools provide students, some teachers and a part of the funding. The University
provides staff personnel, teachers, housing, laboratory facilities and funding. JCU gets funding
from the Dutch Ministry of Education as well, indirectly by science education innovation
committees. The institutional model is depicted in Figure 1. Here, we give some details about the
students, the teachers, the staff and facilities and the funding.
26 partner schools
Utrecht University
provide
- 100 well-motivated students
- 8 secondary school science teachers
- funding
provides
- staff
- university teachers
- funding
- housing
- laboratory facilities
JCU
Dutch Ministry of Education
provides
- funding
Figure 1: the institutional model of JCU
The students
2
The first JCU cohort counted 23 students from 13 partner schools. The second and following
cohorts count about 50 students from 26 schools. So each school sends as a mean 2 students a
year to the JCU.
The students are carefully selected. Each March/April the partner schools advertise the program
and JCU organizes an ‘open day’ for interested students from partner schools and their parents.
The 2006 open day was visited by 170 students. After the open day, students can indicate their
interest to their own school. From the open day information and from their peers who are in the
JCU, applying students know that the JCU program is very demanding. So there is some self
selection.
The schools are allowed to nominate up to four candidates. They are careful in recommending
because JCU students will miss lessons for non-science subjects which are scheduled on JCU
days. Therefore they recommend students who are good in all subjects and not just in science.
Typically about 75 nominations are received for 50 places.
A selection committee consisting of JCU staff, secondary and university teachers has interviews
with all candidates and makes the final selection. The final choice is based on academic potential,
motivation, and the desire to get a varied group in terms of student interests, boy-girl balance, and
representation from different partner schools. Typical drop-out in the first 2 years of operation
has been about 10% and in such cases students are reabsorbed into their school of origin.
Staffing
JCU employs teachers from partner schools to teach the secondary school science. The teachers
selected all have a very solid subject background (a MSc), a continuing interest in research and
education in their discipline, and a high level of dedication. Most of the JCU teachers had been
actively involved in many of the reforms that took place during their careers and all were eager to
try something new once again, like developing and teaching the JCU curriculum.
University lecturers involved are not employed by JCU, but are in the Science Faculty (some are
in the Geology or Medicine Faculty). They are asked to spend a part of their time to teaching JCU
students. They are selected at the base of their teaching skills, interest in younger students and
their subject specialization.
The principal of the JCU comes from the University administration and arrived with a wide
network of university contacts. The Center for Science and Mathematics Education of the Science
Faculty supplied a curriculum coordinator who coordinates the science curriculum, university
enrichment of this curriculum, and organizes curriculum development and outreach to partner
schools.
Finance
The recurrent budget is made up as follows. The partner schools pay a contribution for
membership of the network and a per-student contribution. This covers the salaries of the
secondary school teachers involved in the JCU. Some schools charge parents for the per student
contribution. The University provides classrooms and laboratory facilities. Supported by project
funding from Science Education Innovation Committees, it funds the principal, the curriculum
coordinator, and administrative support. The costs of laboratories, laboratory personnel, lecturers’
time are absorbed by the budgets of the Science Faculty, which initially led to some grumbling as
the JCU was founded in a time of shrinking science budgets. However, once involved, individual
lecturers and staff enjoy their work with JCU students and many have become committed
supporters of the program.
The curriculum development budget offers extra time for teachers to develop academically
enriched lesson materials and for university lecturers to assist the teachers and to develop
university level modules. The development budget was initially guaranteed by the university but
eventually it was possible to obtain subsidies from the national government as the JCU is
considered a laboratory for national curriculum development.
3
The JCU educational model
JCU students have to fulfill the requirements of the regular Dutch pre-university stream
curriculum (Dutch acronym VWO), which is a curriculum typically taken by the top 20% of the
population of 16 –18 year olds. JCU provides the full science and mathematics curriculum for this
in grade 11 and 12. Students spend two days a week at the university campus to take the
science/math component of the secondary curriculum plus enrichment and they spend 3
days/week at their own secondary school to take all the non-science courses (e.g. languages,
social sciences). This is shown in Figure 2.
Students follow
lessons
at JCU
Monday
at their regular schools
Tuesday
physics
mathematics
biology
chemistry
about
Thursday
Friday
non-science subjects
secondary school and university
teachers
taught by
Wednesday
regular teachers
Figure 2: the JCU educational model
The weekly timetable includes that the students miss the Monday and Tuesday lessons for nonscience subjects, as the partner-school-timetables cannot be adapted to the few students that go to
JCU.
The science courses at JCU are taught by secondary and university science teachers. The
secondary school teachers teach the regular VWO syllabus topics. For, secondary teachers know
the requirements much better than university lecturers and are very experienced in preparing their
students for national VWO exams. University lecturers involved do enrichment activities or
supervise JCU student research projects.
The JCU curriculum model
The JCU curriculum includes topics from the national science and mathematics VWO syllabuses
as well as from university topics beyond the regular syllabuses. It has four characteristics that
make it different from science curricula in regular secondary schools (Fig. 3).
JCU CURRICULUM CHARACTERISTICS
Accelerated
Comprehensive
Curricular coherence
Enriched
- exam topics taught
in 60% of regular
time
- ½ year left for
other topics
- labwork in
University labs
- guest lectures
- excursions a.o. to
CERN
- investigations
- modeling
- projects e.g. GPS
Academic modules
e.g.
- modern physics
- nanoscience
-biophysics
Topics from syllabuses
Figure 3:
Topics beyond syllabuses
The JCU curriculum characteristics.
4
Biology and chemistry are scheduled on Monday and physics and mathematics on Tuesday. Lab
work, guest lectures and projects are scheduled on afternoons. Regularly, the normal time table is
changed for interdisciplinary projects of investigations (pre-thesis and thesis). In the 12th grade
classes, much time is spent to university modules that go beyond the secondary curriculum.
Accelerated pace
Teaching the topics from the national VWO syllabuses for Biology, Physics, Chemistry and
Mathematics is completed in about 60% of the time needed by regular schools. Thus, 6 months is
saved to study topics at a university level and the secondary school curriculum is enriched.
Initially, the teachers considered their first priority to complete the secondary school program in
the first JCU-year, so that the second year would be free for university level courses. Within 6
weeks it was clear that this idea would lead to a pressure cooker curriculum with little extra
educational value. So we experienced that one must avoid becoming a high-pressured “prep”
school which only differs from regular schools by its fast pace. We adopted the ‘compacting and
enriching model’ of Pluymakers and Span (2001). The pace was slowed down and enrichment
came into the first year already.
Comprehensive
In spite of the accelerated pace, the curriculum is taught in a more comprehensive and profound
way than at the regular Dutch schools. Much lesson time is spent doing lab work in university
laboratory facilities while at regular schools lab work has declined strongly (and unintentionally)
since school reforms in 1998. Often additional depth and breadth is added to syllabus topics.
Much time is gained by leaving trivia and little details to the students to find out.
Focus on coherence of sciences (inter-disciplinarity)
All JCU-students study the full science and mathematics curricula. Dropping Biology or a part of
Physics is not an option while it is in the regular system. Therefore it is possible to explore the
coherence of the sciences. For example, a project on GPS is taught jointly by Physics and
Mathematics. And biophysical topics are studied in a project with physics and biology.
Moreover, students do interdisciplinary investigations. They get much room for asking their own
questions and finding answers, for developing their inquiring mind. Two big investigation
assignments are conducted in university laboratories, guided by researchers from Utrecht
University:
 the pre-thesis at the end of grade 11 (60 student hours)
 the JCU thesis half way grade 12 (120 student hours)
Moving in three dimensions
Option topic for JCU pre-thesis; Coaching: dr. R. van Beers
The Physics of the Human Perception research group has recently bought apparatus that can
measure very precise and with very high frequencies the movements somebody makes in three
dimensions. It can be investigated, e.g., how well somebody can move his finger along a virtual
straight line.
How well is this done if the hand is visible and how well if the eyes are closed?
Does it work better on a table top than in free space? And are there differences between moving
vertically and horizontally? But other issues that are thought by the students themselves can be
investigated as well.
Figure 4:
Description of a topic for the pre-thesis research that the 11th grade students can opt for.
5
Through the JCU thesis students fulfill the research project requirement of the regular Dutch
syllabuses, except that they spend 120 instead of the regular 80 student hours and they are
expected to perform at an undergraduate level.
University researchers in science and mathematics departments are asked to propose pre-thesis
research projects. In the past two years, they came up with attractive investigations (see Fig. 4). In
teams of 2 or 3, the students choose one of the projects proposed. The projects are carried out in a
typical university research environment guided by a researcher. If students had to formulate their
own projects, much time would be used unproductively in exploring alternatives. Moreover, the
researcher mentors might have to work outside their specialization and interest and be less
effective.
A similar procedure is followed for the JCU thesis. Students can choose their own topic or opt for
projects offered by researchers, but they do have a greater role in defining their research question
and methods of investigation than in the pre-thesis.
Title of JCU thesis
Physics Domain
Holography, visual trickery
Holography
El Niño, the problem child
Meteorology / oceanography
Reflection as a means for perfection
Solar cells
In the future travel by boat rather than by train!
Fluids / transportation technology
Figure 5.
Some titles of 2006 JCU theses covering a physics domain. Full reports (in Dutch) can be
found on www.jcu.uu.nl .
Enriched program
We have spent much effort finding out how to introduce an intellectual enrichment in a broad
sense (wisdom, intelligence, creativity – synthesized, Sternberg 2003). In the 11th grade classes
teaching topics beyond the syllabuses can have the form of a seminar or a lecture (e.g. about
relativity), of an excursion to a university lab (e.g. the Utrecht VanderGraaf accelerator). In the
12th grade class, university modules of a large size are taught by university specialists, elaborating
issues at the front of research. In the 2006/07 course, ‘modules’ containing syllabus as well as
academic topics will be tried out.
Titles of some interdisciplinary projects
Titles of the university modules
DNA (biology and chemistry)
Modeling
Human perception (physics and biology)
Astrophysics
Luminescence (physics and chemistry)
HIV/AIDS
GPS (physics and mathematics)
Nanoscience
Figure 6:
Some topics in the enriched part of the curriculum
6
The dissemination model
To be a working place for innovation of science curricula is a main aim of JCU (Van der Valk
2006). This fits into the context of the science and mathematics reforms that are taking place in
Dutch secondary education. A main objective of the reform is to update the curriculum content
with recent trends in scientific research and to add to narrowing the gap between secondary and
university education. Among others, a new integrated science subject is to be introduced into
senior secondary education: Nature, Life and Technology. In JCU, new curriculum materials that
fit into the reform plans are developed and tried out. Because of its close interaction with the
University and its characteristic of interdisciplinarity, JCU can be a prominent working place to
develop and try out reform education in spite of the fact that its student population is unique
rather than representative for the pre-university stream in Dutch secondary schools. Results will
be disseminated to partner schools and to other secondary schools. By disseminating, JCU want
to bring a new élan into the science and mathematics departments in secondary schools. For this,
a dissemination model (see Fig. 6) has been developed consisting of three phases.
In the first phase, new lesson series are developed by university and secondary teachers, are
taught in JCU and experiences are evaluated. The ‘university modules’ are examples of these.
In the second phase, the lesson series are revised, adapted to the regular 12th grade students and
made available to partner school teachers. They test (parts of) the material in their classes and
evaluation studies are carried out.
In the third phase, a last revision is carried out and the lesson materials are made available to all
secondary schools.
Development of innovative lesson series for:
- the traditional science subjects
- the interdisciplinary subject Nature Life and Technology
Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3
JCU version
Partner school version
Final version
Taught in JCU
Available to partner schools
Available to all schools
Figure 7.
The JCU dissemination model
JCU experiences of two years
The start of JCU
The first cohort of students turned out to be good students with many interests, talents, and
hobbies. In the national TV broadcast on the opening day of the JCU, students talked confidently
about how their JCU is different, goes much deeper into the subject matter and that it allows them
to pursue their own interest and research. At the time their statements were only based on the trial
lessons during an Open Day. The advertising had clearly worked, but would the execution of the
program live up to that?
Labwork
At the start of JCU, it was decided that mornings would be theory and afternoons would be
laboratory work. That meant that 50% of lesson time would be spent on laboratory. Of course the
laboratory should emphasize real research rather than cookbook exercises, however, research on
laboratory teaching (Hodson, 1993; Hofstein & Lunetta 1982, 2004) has raised many questions
about the efficiency and outcomes of laboratory teaching methods. Evaluations at various times
7
during the first two years of the program have shown consistently that JCU students value their
learning experience in the labs very highly in all subjects and that they derive a lot of confidence
from it. We do not yet have sufficient data to analyze the learning outcomes of the JCU labs
critically.
JCU students’ progress
All 23 first cohort students passed after one year to the 12 th grade in their schools. At the end of
the second year, they passed the national examination with medium to high marks. Now, 20
students go to some university, the other three take a time-out year. 18 students chose a science or
science related study. One opted for Economics and one for a social study. Half of the group
opted for Utrecht University. Three students, who wanted to do a technological study, could not
opt for Utrecht, as it has no technological faculty.
All 48 second cohort students have passed to the 12th grade in their schools and will be in JCU
again.
Evaluation of JCU experiences
The JCU experiences of students, teachers and partner schools have been evaluated. All groups
were very positive about JCU and its curriculum, although many suggestions for further
improvements were given.
The students enjoy the open and stimulating atmosphere in the JCU. The accelerated and enriched
JCU curriculum has appeared to be feasible to them. The students report to have got more
interested in the sciences. A typical student reaction explaining why says: ‘how could you change
mathematics? For maths you just have to make many many exercises? Forget it! In the JCU we
do it in a more comprehensive way! Of course you do exercises in the JCU as well, but you do
more. Sometimes you work on issues with your peers. Then you have to present your solution on
the blackboard. That results in interesting discussions!’
The secondary JCU teachers experience their teaching in the JCU as a real challenge. They have
experienced that teaching the JCU curriculum is feasible to them, however it is complicated
because, among others, complex organisation (e.g. using university facilities in different
buildings) and co-operation with university teachers. They have been inspired to change their
teaching in their own schools and to inform their school colleagues about their experiences.
The JCU partner schools have various motives of participating in the JCU, ranging from giving
their students more opportunities for learning to promoting curriculum innovations in the school.
When the participation in JCU started, the science teachers had mixed feelings because they
missed the talented students in their classes. Having heard their experiences in the JCU, they
realised that they could never give them what JCU means for these students. Moreover, they see
some competition in their 4V classes: students striving at being selected for JCU! So the support
of the JCU in the science departments has been growing. It results in science teachers taking part
in the curriculum innovation activities of JCU.
At this moment, new schools are applying for partnership in the JCU. We have to think how we
are going to cope with that.
Problems
Students who are used to be at the top of their class are in for a little shock when they are
suddenly grouped with equals. Furthermore the fast pace and intensive school days from 8.30 –
16.30 create tension. For most students this tension is quite productive but some need frequent
reassurance during the first 6 months.
Surprisingly being out of their school of origin for 2 days a week is not a problem socially.
Students report that they can maintain their old friendships at school as well as new friendships at
8
the Junior College. They have proved to be able to cope with the timetable problems in their
regular schools very well. Firstly they are the best students and do not need all lessons, secondly
the pace and pressure at JCU is so high that students experience the non-science lessons at their
own school as a breeze. Logistically there are frequent problems, for example with tests for nonscience subjects scheduled on JCU days or with excursions. JCU students can cope with missing
30% or even 50% of a non-science subject. What often does go wrong is communication, that
somehow logistical information given during a lesson missed (assignment, test date) is not
properly transmitted. Each partner school has assigned a mentor for the JCU students who assists
with straightening out these kinds of problems.
Every year a few students drop out, about 10%. The main reason has been the fast pace, but there
have also been withdrawals due to a student being selected for a national sports team. Apart from
being much more demanding academically and in terms of homework, students also travel much
farther to get to the JCU. Travel times are usually at least ½ hour more one-way than time needed
to go to their regular school.
The future of JCU
JCU was a project that would last 3 years. Because of the positive evaluation by students, partner
schools and Utrecht University, it is recently decided that JCU will continue in the years to come
on a regular basis. Contribution to the science curriculum reforms will be a main focus of the
activities.
Now we know the strengths and the challenges of the JCU curriculum. JCU will not become a
static institution, but a dynamic enterprise of teacher, students, universities and schools.
Therefore, changes in the curriculum already have been planned and will be carried out in the
years to come. E.g. still more emphasis in class 5V on ‘enriching’ and less on ‘acceleration’. The
co-operation with the partner schools will be intensified by developing innovative modules and
implementing them not only in the JCU, but also in the partner schools.
www.jcu.uu.nl
References
Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school
science. Studies in Science Education, 22, 85-142
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of
research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201-217.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (2004). The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the 21st
Century. Science Education, 88 (1), 28 – 54.
Ngoi, M.& Vondracek, M. (1997). Working With Gifted Science Students in a Public High School
Environment: One School's Approach. Journal of secondary gifted education, 15 (4),141-147.
Peterson, J. S., & Colangelo, N. (1996). Gifted Achievers and Underachievers: A Comparison of Patterns
Found in School Files. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74 (4), 399 – 407.
Pluymakers, M., & Span, P., (2001). Onderwijs aan begaafde leerlingen in het VO. Compacten en
verrijken. (Teaching talented students in secondary education. Compacting and Enriching).
Alphen aan de Rijn: Kluwer.
Sternberg, R.J. (2003). WICKS as a model of Giftedness. High Ability Studies 14 (2), 109 – 137.
Valk, T. van der, (2006). Junior College Utrecht, a Working place for Innovative Science Teaching. Paper
to Fysica 2006, Leiden, April 28 2006. www.fysica.nl (click parallel sessions/physics teaching/
Ton van der Valk paper)
Watter, J.J., & Dietzmann, C.M., (2003). The gifted students in science: fulfilling potential. Australian
Science Teachers’ Journal49 (3), 46 – 53.
9