Changing practices:
The role of curriculum development
Robin Millar
University of York
S-TEAM mid-project Conference,
Glasgow
14 October 2010
• Can science education curriculum
redesign provide significant improvement
on its own, or is additional change
necessary, for example in assessment or
pedagogy?
Changing classroom practices
what
curriculum
we teach
howpedagogy
we teach
how we check what
assessment
students have learned
Changing classroom practices
curriculum
For significant
improvement,
we need to
address all
three.
pedagogy
assessment
Twenty First Century Science
What is Twenty First Century
Science?
• A suite of 6 inter-related courses
• Two-year courses (students aged 15-16)
• Each taking 10% of total curriculum time
• Each leading to a General Certificate of
Secondary Education (GCSE) qualification
• Designed to provide a range of options to
suit students with different interests and
aspirations
Starting point
“A central fact about science is that it is actually done by a
very small fraction of the population. The total of all
scientists and engineers with graduate level qualifications
is only a few percent of the whole population of an
industrialised country. Thus the primary goal of a general
science education cannot be to train this minority who will
actually do science.”
Ogborn, J. (2004). Science and Technology: What to teach? In M. Michelini (ed.) Quality
Development in Teacher Education and Training (pp. 69-84). Udine: Forum.
Starting point
“A central fact about science is that it is actually done by a
very small fraction of the population. The total of all
scientists and engineers with graduate level qualifications
is only a few percent of the whole population of an
industrialised country. Thus the primary goal of a general
science education cannot be to train this minority who will
actually do science.”
Ogborn, J. (2004). Science and Technology: What to teach? In M. Michelini (ed.) Quality
Development in Teacher Education and Training (pp. 69-84). Udine: Forum.
Beyond 2000 report
• “The science curriculum from
5 to 16 should be seen
primarily as a course to
enhance general ‘scientific
literacy’.”
• How can we achieve this,
whilst also catering for the
needs of future
specialists?
A design challenge
• The school science curriculum has two purposes:
to develop the
scientific literacy
of all students
to provide the first stages
of a training in science
for some students
• These require distinctively different approaches
• Can we resolve the tension between them, by
designing a curriculum structure that addresses
both?
Science curriculum model for 1516 year olds (pre-2003)
Double Award GCSE Science
20% of curriculum time
Counts as 2 GCSE subjects
Taken by >80% of students
- with <10% doing less (1 GCSE) and <10% doing more (3 GCSEs)
Twenty First Century Science
curriculum model
GCSE Science
10% curriculum time
GCSE Additional
Science
10% curriculum time
or
Emphasis on
scientific literacy
(the science everyone
needs to know)
GCSE Additional
Applied Science
10% curriculum time
for all students
for some students
citizens
citizens
future
scientists
future
scientists
Twenty First Century Science
Core: for all
students
Additional
options: for
some
students
GCSE Science
Core course for all
students
With an emphasis on
developing students’
scientific literacy
How is it different from previous
science courses at this level?
• More obvious links to the science you hear, or read
about, out of school
• Some new content, for example:
• risk
• evaluating claims about correlations and risk factors
• clinical trials
• More emphasis on Ideas about Science
• in the context of evaluating scientific knowledge claims
• More opportunities to talk, discuss, analyse, and develop
arguments
• about science
• and about its applications and implications
Ideas about Science
• All data are uncertain: how to
assess uncertainty and deal with it
• How to evaluate claims about
correlations and causes
• Scientific knowledge claims are of
different kinds – ranging from
established ‘facts’ to tentative
explanations
• How the scientific community
works: peer review
• How to express and compare
levels of risk, and weigh up risks
and benefits
• The issues which applications of
science raise, and how individuals
and society decide on these
Science Explanations
• The ‘big ideas’ of science:
• The idea of a ‘chemical reaction’:
rearrangement of atoms; nothing
created or destroyed
• The idea of ‘radiation’: energy
travelling outwards from a source;
may go through objects, or be
reflected or absorbed ….
• The gene theory to explain
inherited characteristics
• etc.
Course structure
Science
Explanations
Modules
(on topics of
interest)
etc.
Ideas about
Science
What worked, what didn’t?
Internal evaluation of pilot trial
• Almost all pilot school teachers thought the core
Science course was significantly different from previous
science courses
• Relates to students’ experiences and interests
• Stimulates, and provides more opportunities for, discussion
• More opportunities for students to contribute ideas and views
• Over 90% of pilot school teachers judged the course
successful in improving their students’ scientific literacy
• 70% thought their students’ response in science
classes was noticeably better than in previous years
For more detail, see:
Millar, R. (2006). Twenty First Century Science: Insights from the development and
implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of
Science Education, 28 (13), 1499-1522.
External evaluation of pilot trial
• Positive teacher and student response
• Students report more interest in reading about
science
• Support and training were essential to improve
teachers’ understanding of course aims and
confidence with the new teaching styles involved
• Teachers needed time to assimilate the new
approach
• Summative tests (external examinations) developed
by the Awarding Body did not fully reflect the course
developers’ aims and intentions
For full report, see:
http://www.21stcenturyscience.org/data/files/c21-evaln-rpt-feb07-10101.pdf
What did we learn from the pilot trial?
• It is possible to make a ‘scientific literacy’ course
• which teachers find workable, and many find attractive
• which improves student engagement with science
• which integrates science content and ideas about science
• Together with Additional Science, this can provide good
access to more advanced study
• Teachers need time, and considerable support, to take
on more discussion-based teaching approaches and
methods, and make these work well
• It is difficult to develop and implement forms of
assessment that encourage and support the teaching
of science for scientific literacy
• Examiners’ imagination
• External constraints
Beyond the pilot trial
Completions in June 2008:
Course
Candidates
GCSE Science
118000
GCSE Additional Science
71000
GCSE Additional Applied Science
31000
GCSE Biology
12000
GCSE Chemistry
11000
GCSE Physics
11000
~130000 students in total taking Twenty First Century Science
(23% of national cohort)
1125 centres (schools and colleges)
Impact on post-GCSE course choice
• Survey in Autumn Term 2008
• when first cohort of Twenty First Century Science
students began AS courses
• Questionnaires sent to all centres with Sixth
Forms
• with10+ candidates for (Science + Additional Science)
or at least two of Biology/Chemistry/Physics
• 40% response rate
• Follow up telephone survey of a random sample of
15% of non-respondents, to compare with those who
returned questionnaires
Millar, R. (2010). Increasing participation in science beyond GCSE: The impact
of Twenty First Century Science. School Science Review, 91 (337), 41-47.
Reported change in AS uptake
compared to previous year (n=155)
Number of centres
Change in uptake
AS
Biology
AS
AS
Chemistry Physics
AS Applied
Science
increased quite a lot
51
36
32
11
increased a little
41
45
55
6
stayed about the same
49
58
55
7
decreased a little
11
12
5
4
decreased quite a lot
2
2
3
1
no response
1
2
5
126
Number of students starting AS
sciences
Number of
centres
2008 entry
Entry in
previous
year(s)
%
increase
Biology
79
3145
2417
30
Chemistry
78
1935
1560
24
Physics
77
1592
1155
38
For comparison:
National data on AS-level completions in 2009 show increases
(compared with 2008) of:
10% for Biology
8% for Chemistry
9.5% for Physics
• Can science education curriculum
redesign provide significant improvement
on its own, or is additional change
necessary, for example in assessment or
pedagogy?
Some reactions
• Curriculum redesign can trigger some positive changes
• Matching curriculum content better to students’ needs and
interests
• Leading to classes that are more rewarding for many teachers
• Successful implementation usually requires a change in
pedagogy
• Activities that involve new and unfamiliar teaching methods
• A new approach may involve a reappraisal of values (views of
purpose and priorities of school science)
‘… the main reason for pupils’ dissatisfaction with lower secondary
school science lies with the impoverished forms of pedagogy that are a
feature of most science lessons.’
(Galton, M. (2009). Primary-secondary transfer in science.
Perspectives on Education, 2. London: The Wellcome Trust.)
• Assessment is the most significant driver of real change
• It defines the real learning goals
• It facilitates communication between designers and users
• If it is ‘high stakes’, it strongly influences classroom behaviours
The idea of ‘backward design’:
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006).
Understanding by design, 2nd edn. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Supplementary question
• How can the research base in science
education best be mobilised to support
science teachers in schools?
Some responses
• Let’s be realistic about the ‘research base’
• Research has been more successful in
identifying learning difficulties than in testing
solutions
• We know more about what learners think than about
how to change what they think
• We know a lot about students’ attitudes to science,
but less about how to change these
How can the research base best be
mobilised to support teachers?
• Research-informed teaching & learning
sequences
• key design criteria (Andersson & Bach); ‘critical
details’ (Viennot); design briefs (Leach & Scott)
• Research-informed resources and tools
• EPSE project: diagnostic questions
• ‘Getting Practical’ audit tool: focused reflection on
current practice