Labs, resources and budgets

Lab work is crucial to engage children in science

Lab work is crucial to engage children in science

Classroom practicals form an integral part of many science courses. Teachers are encouraged to include them in their teaching by both examination specifications and national schemes of work (guidelines which help schools implement the national curriculum). In addition, studies have shown that practical and investigative work has a marked positive effect on pupils' enjoyment and learning of science.

Given the importance of classroom practicalities in enhancing pupils' experience of science, the RSC was worried that a lack of good facilities and modern equipment in schools may be turning young people off pursuing the study of science. it was also anxious that these factors might discouraging science graduates from taking up a career in teaching. 

The RSC asked the CLEAPSS School Science Service (the Consortium of Local Education Authorities for the Provision of Science Services - an advisory body supporting the teaching of practical science) to undertake an investigation into whether these concerns were justified. 

The work was divided into two main projects: The first (the Lab Project) looked into the current standards of science laboratories and resources and the levels of budgets required to make improvements where necessary. The second project (the Resources Project) set out to determine the per pupil cost of providing the apparatus, resources and chemicals needed for an effective science education. 

Research was then carried out to see how this related to actual provision made in schools. In April 2004 the final report was published, entitled Laboratories, Resources and Budgets. 

Data collection

CLEAPSS sent questionnaires to every state school in England. Half of the schools in each of the 148 Local Education Authorities were sent a questionnaire relating to laboratories, the other half received one relating to resources and budgets. High levels of return for both surveys (42% on the Lab Project and 26% on the Resources Project) give high confidence in the results and indicate the importance that schools place on this matter. 

The costings used in the Resources Project were based on revised and updated estimates produced by the Royal Society in 1997. 

The Lab Project

The results of the Lab Project make unsettling reading, with only 34% of school laboratories in the sample rating good or excellent. 41% were rated as basic and uninspiring, and an alarming 25% were rated as unsafe or unsatisfactory. This means that, when pupils are in a science laboratory, their experience is unsafe, unsatisfactory or uninspiring for 65% of the time. 

In addition 13% of science classes are not taught in a laboratory at all. Teachers reported that, on average, one additional laboratory per school is required to allow all science lessons to be taught in a laboratory. This equates to an under provision of at least 3,500 laboratories. 

Problems were also brought to light regarding the preparation areas that support science teaching and the storage and preparation space available to science technicians. 

The research clearly showed that significant work needs to be done to bring many school laboratories, and the associated areas, up to a standard that will promote a positive learning experience to science students. This evidence provided the RSC with a strong case to lobby the Government for such improvements.

Teachers classification of school laboratories from RSC report, Laboratories, Resources and Budgets

Improving laboratory standards

The cost of implementing the improvements required is substantial; if all issues are addressed at once, the total
finance needed is estimated to be in the region of a staggering £1.38 billion. This represents the total cost to upgrade to a 'good' standard only. Table 1 illustrates where the money is needed. 

Although the Government has committed £2.2 billion in 2005-06 to the Building Schools for the Future initiative - which aims to bring all school buildings in England up to a modern standard by 2015 - none of this money has been ring-fenced for laboratories.

Table 1: Estimated costs of improving school laboratories

The Resources Project

The results of the Resources Project indicated further shortfalls in funding. Over 90% of schools who responded to the survey judged that the finances allocated were inadequate to sustain an effective level of science education. 

In some cases the situation was so severe that schools were not able to meet National Curriculum (especially in Information and Communication Technology (ICT)) and practical work was being cut down.

According to the findings, the average amount made available to science departments in the 2003-04 financial year (in state schools) was just £9.89 per pupil. This is only slightly above the £9.40 average reported in a survey from 1981, indicating that the increase in funding has not even kept pace with the rate of inflation (despite the rising cost of chemicals exceeding the inflation rate). 

The low average amount per pupil is not the sole concern highlighted; there is also a surprisingly wide range within this sum - from £0.64 per pupil to £71.43. It is difficult to justify such extremes. There is a great worry that, at the lower end, the impoverishment of the curriculum is likely to affect pupils' motivation and interest in continuing with the study of science. 

Essential science resources

The Resources Project also investigated the per pupil cost of providing the equipment, chemicals and biological materials required to teach science effectively. The estimates included an 'essential' list of resources and a 'desirable' list (the latter includes items necessary to teach science post-16, but which also enhance the curriculum for 14- 16 years olds in Key Stages 3 and 4). 

Science departments need approximately a further £37 million per year to provide the essential resources for teaching science; equivalent to an additional £10,000 per science department. If desirable resources are also taken into account the total cost rises to £62 million. 

The survey also quantifies substantial shortfalls in post-16 work. 

What happened next?

The final report was sent to Ministers, government departments, the science education community and all secondary schools in the UK. The results of the report have since been validated by the Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education) Chief Inspector's report for 2005. 

The RSC will continue to press for schools to be funded properly to provide an exciting science education in modern, well equipped accommodation.