21st century science – on trial

Eighty secondary schools across the UK are taking part in a major experiment, the results of which could underpin a new model for the science curriculum at Key Stage 4 from 2006 onwards. 21st century science, a GCSE science specification commissioned by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) in 2001 and developed by the University of York Science Education Group (UYSEG) together with the Nuffield Curriculum Centre, London, is on trial.

The model stems from a growing dissatisfaction with National Curriculum (NC) science, a debate that was marked by the publication of Beyond 2000 a report of a series of seminars on the future of science education. The ‘one size fits all approach’ of NC science had been developed for the minority of students who go on to study science A-levels and was turning too many students off science at this level. Since then, after numerous Government consultations with just about everyone with an interest in science education – students, teachers, university lecturers, parents, scientists, politicians, and the science-based professional bodies – a new set of more flexible KS4 science specifications is promised for 2006. 21st century science, backed by the awarding body OCR, is the first to be trialled with its potential customers.

The over arching theme for 21st century science is that compulsory school science up to the age of 16 has two main roles. One is to develop ‘scientific literacy’ in all students, encouraging them to make sense of the science they will encounter throughout their lives. The second is to provide those students who want to study science post-16 with the necessary conceptual science base. There are three distinct routes for students to choose from.

• Core science: scientific literacy for all. This is a compulsory component of the course, which takes 10 per cent of curriculum time and leads to one GCSE qualification. Students take nine compulsory modules (see Box), which provide the contexts for the scientific concepts – such as chemicals, chemical change, materials and their properties – and include ‘ideas about science’. The latter are intended to show students how scientific knowledge is obtained and developed as well as its limitations. The theory is that students should then be better placed to give opinions and make decisions on science-related issues as they journey through life. Assessment of the core is made up of three one-hour exams, each covering three modules, plus coursework, ie the interpretation and evaluation of primary data (6 per cent); and a case study of a science-related issue in the media (24 per cent). There is no terminal paper or synoptic questions.   

Students can also opt to study for double award science by taking one of the following two courses, both of which take 10 per cent of curriculum time and each lead to one GCSE (or whatever these are likely to be called in the future).

• Additional science (applied). This course has been designed for students who may use science in their work, for example in technical occupations. Teachers can choose three out of six modules (see Box), each of which is set in a context in which scientific procedures are involved and which is likely to be encountered by many students in their personal or working lives. The emphasis in this course is on developing students’ practical competencies related to standard procedures in the work-place as well as problem-solving skills. According to the project team, measurement is at the heart of what scientists do and so the concepts of valid measurement are central to an applied course. Again assessment is by end of module tests (ie 3 × 15 per cent) plus coursework, comprising an investigation (15 per cent) and evidence of ‘work-related skills’ (40 per cent).
   
• Additional science (general). This course has been designed as a preparation for those students who intend to go on to study conventional science A-levels. The emphasis is on understanding scientific concepts and theorising. As far as the chemistry component is concerned, this course introduces a view of the world that seeks to explain patterns in the behaviour of chemicals in terms of atomic structure. Ideas about structure and bonding are introduced in the context of changes in the natural environment. A third module illustrates the importance of chemistry in the analysis and synthesis of important chemicals in foods, drugs, clothing etc. Assessment is by end of module tests (three papers testing three modules at a time); coursework comprising an investigation (15 per cent), which seeks evidence of a strategy, collecting and interpreting data, and summarising and suggesting explanations, evaluation and presentation; and an ‘open book’ investigation (15 per cent) for which students evaluate, analyse and interpret secondary data and scientific information.   

According to Andrew Hunt, one of the directors of the project, ‘some of the most enthusiastic feedback from the pilot schools has been from teachers taking the applied course, which they say is motivating some of their students to want to study science post-16’. This applied course, he comments, was originally aimed at young people who would take the double award but who find conceptual science irrelevant and uninteresting. Broadly speaking, the entry for Additional (applied) in the pilot is biased towards foundation tier students, whereas Additional (general) is biased towards the higher tier students. ‘However’, he adds, ‘what we have learnt from this initial phase of the pilot is that, crucially, the applied course rewards students who are performing at lower grade levels – through hands-on mastery of standard procedures, which they can relate to the working world. In short, there are lower rungs to the ladder of the applied course that are rewarding to climb but, in the end – in terms of intellectual challenge – they can climb just as high as those students on the general course though they will have had a different experience’.

Eighteen months on, with feedback from the pilot teachers together with input from practical scientists and curriculum developers, notably Ken Gadd with his vast experience of developing Double Award Applied Science, Hunt believes they now have a rigorous applied course that can be used with students working at all levels of performance (A–G). He advises, though, that progression routes for these students be carefully thought out by individual teachers in terms of eg local provision of vocational A-levels or conventional A-levels. After all, he adds, choosing two chemistry modules, for example, from Additional (applied) would in some institutions be considered adequate preparation for A-level chemistry. And increasingly many teachers, especially in FE colleges, comment that it’s not uncommon for students working in the intermediate ability range to take three years to reach level three qualifications (academic or vocational).

The compulsory core course has also received much positive feedback from the pilot. In the past teachers and students alike have questioned the significance of parts of National Curriculum science. In contrast many of the pilot teachers have commented that what’s in the core are the sorts of things every young person is entitled to learn and think about. One teacher comments: ‘Core science allows pupils to delve more deeply into the topics. Pupils appear more interested and enthusiastic in the lessons. They don’t just see the lessons as being about how to pass exams’. Students have also commented that they enjoy being given the opportunity to discuss topics that affect them or they are familiar with, such as hay fever, asthma and air quality.

Kay Stephenson, head of chemistry at Felsted school in Essex, told Education in Chemistry about some of the reasons why she was swayed into trialling this new course. ‘We chose the core plus Additional (general) because this was closer to what we were already doing and would allow us to continue with the arrangement of three ‘specialist’ teachers. In the conventional course we had been following the coursework didn’t fall out naturally, it all seemed a bit contrived and a ‘hoop jumping’ exercise. Also the requirement for pupils to ‘predict’ seemed very false. We were caught in the dilemma of trying to make it a genuine ‘investigation’ but aware that it was difficult for pupils to predict and explain their prediction using scientific knowledge and understanding without having been taught at least some of the material. 21st century science assesses ’strategy’ instead of planning (and predicting) and does not require pupils to plan as such but to devise, carry out, adapt and make decisions in light of their experiences. Also the strands within the ‘strategy skill’ allow for the fact that some pupils who may not be able to frame the problem to be investigated can still work at a high level when it comes to devising the experiment’.

‘Having now seen some of the applied materials’, Stephenson added, ‘I would like to consider whether or not this may, in the future, be appropriate for some of our pupils. It is certainly not a soft option but I think it caters for pupils with different aptitudes. All in all, now that we’re into the second year, I’m enjoying teaching the course. The Year 11 unit G5: Chemicals in the natural environment builds on some of the ideas met in the core module C1: Air quality and C4: Material choices, and the general unit G2: Chemical patterns. The G5 unit also offers a logical route through structure and bonding by linking to the properties of materials to be found in the atmosphere, hydrosphere and lithosphere. It’s good fun and the pupils seem to appreciate finding out about these things, they certainly ask lots of questions and seem genuinely interested in the course. The important thing is that teachers’ feedback from the pilot is being taken onboard by the project team and the materials are improving as a result’.

The experiment has still a long way to run. The project team is currently reworking materials for the core to make sure that they are rewarding across the whole ability range. As Hunt says, ‘We are trying to develop a new model of the science curriculum. We’ve had a lot of positive feedback from the pilot centres, but it will be crucial that we have an independent evaluation of the course to make sure we are addressing the flaws in the current NC as identified by the previous research and consultations with students and teachers’. Encouragingly, he says, other organisations, including Energy Foresight, the Gatsby Foundation, BBC Worldwide, among others, are aligning themselves with 21st century science to produce resources to support the course.

That all said, Martin Hollins (subject officer at QCA) told Education in Chemistry that by the time readers receive this November issue, all the awarding bodies will have received the new GCSE criteria and will have started developing their GCSE specifications for submission for Easter 2005. Accreditation of the specifications by QCA is expected in the summer with delivery to the schools by September 2005. There’s no guarantee that all the new specifications will be clones or slight variants of 21st century science but they will be different to the current specifications and offer some flexibility and choice.

Kathryn Roberts