As well as being fun, practical experiments have a positive effect on children's attitudes towards science. But at the very time when we need to make science learning more enjoyable and engaging, exciting hands-on work in schools seems to be on the decline. Health and safety restrictions are often quoted as a barrier to exciting practical work, but how justified are these fears?

Science practical work plays an important role in inspiring students, and provides a powerful aid to learning. Experimental work also increases familiarity with the objects and tools of science, helping students to understand both content and scientific processes.

An overwhelming majority of school science teachers believe that including more experiments and scientific enquiry in lessons would have a positive impact on student performance. In addition, surveys of students themselves have suggested a desire for more practical work that would offer increased challenge and stimulation.

Practical work increases motivation, develops thinking skills, supports collaborative working and helps learners to connect science to the everyday world. So why is it on the decline? A number of reasons have been cited - from a lack of time to inadequate equipment and space. 

Practical workincreases motivation and helps learners to connect science to the everyday world

Concerns

Bearing in mind the importance of practical work, the RSC has concerns about how much is being carried out in some UK secondary schools. To get a clearer picture of the situation, the RSC commissioned CLEAPSS (the Consortium of Local Education Authorities for the Provision of Science Services) to investigate the matter. CLEAPSS is an organisation that provides schools with clear advice and guidance on health and safety, for example by providing standard risk assessments in science and technology.

The RSC was particularly worried that practical work is being curtailed due to myths and misunderstandings about health and safety regulations. A presumption that certain experiments or chemicals are banned seems to be preventing some exciting practicals taking place.  

The survey

Questionnaires were sent to a representative sample of over 1,500 secondary schools in every education authority in the UK. Parallel questionnaires were distributed to education officers in all 634 education authorities.

The questionnaire included general questions related to organisational aspects of health and safety, along with 40 questions about materials and practical activities used in schools. 

The overall response to the survey was good - with almost 25% of questionnaires returned from schools and 10% from education officers (meaning one third of education authorities were represented). 

National and local bans

Contrary to popular impression, very few science activities and chemicals which schools might consider using are banned at a national level. The major ones that are banned are the use of benzene (and solutions containing more than 1% benzene) and various ozone depleters. Only two of the 40 activities described in the questionnaire would come under this ban (use of benzene and crude oil).

Alongside these bans there are restrictions on activities such as holding radioactive substances, making explosives, experiments involving cruelty to vertebrates and removal of protected species from the wild.

In addition, advisers and inspectors employed by local education authorities (LEAs) can direct teachers not to use other chemicals or scientific activities. But there is no evidence that arbitrary decisions or over-reaction on the part of LEA officers is the factor inhibiting practical science. 

Local confusion

Almost 61% of education authorities replying indicated that they do not ban any chemicals or activities. Many of them stated they follow CLEAPSS and SSERC (CLEAPSS' Scottish sister body) guidelines. Where hazards may arise, schools are required to carry out risk assessments and implement control measures.

Despite the lack of a national ban, almost all of the 40 listed items were banned locally by at least one authority. There was confusion in certain LEAs, with different responses on local bans from officers in the same authorities. 

"teachers and technicians have misconceptions about the type of experiments that are banned in UK schools"

In 45 education authorities replies were received from both education officers and schools, allowing interesting conclusions to be drawn on the schools' knowledge of local policies. Although most of the schools identified the national bans on benzene and crude oil, the majority also believed - incorrectly - that at least two or three (and sometimes many more) other chemicals or activities were also banned.

Where education authorities had introduced local bans, none were correctly identified by the relevant schools. Where schools correctly identified national or local bans, few (less than 2%) could provide supporting documentation.

Misconceptions

The report confirms that teachers and technicians have misconceptions about the type of chemicals, activities and experiments that are banned nationally in UK schools. In some cases, teaching is being inhibited by unjustified concerns about health and safety.

The survey highlighted a number of these, including that 70% think it is illegal for pupils to sample their own blood and 32% who believe pupils cannot experiment on their own saliva samples. 

At least 15 other chemicals and activities on the list - including the ammonium dichromate volcano experiment and keeping giant African land snails - were thought to be banned by between 10% and 30% of respondents, despite only a very few small number of local authorities introducing such bans. 

Other barriers

Substantial percentages of schools discounted some of the more exciting and entertaining activities as they do not feel they have time to carry them out or did not believe they were relevant to their work. The response raises concerns about approaches to teaching and interpretation of curricular requirements.

Old favourites

Positively, the results show that some of the more exciting activities are still being undertaken. 97% of schools demonstrate the reaction between potassium and water, 96% the van der Graaff generator and 90% dissect a heart. These old favourites were probably responsible for engaging many of us in science.

What are we doing about it?

There is a clear need to improve the understanding of schools and employers about the balance between appropriate safety and creating exciting, stimulating science lessons. Although there is significant advice available to schools from CLEAPSS and SSERC, it seems much of this is ignored resulting in an over-cautious approach to practical work.

The RSC have sent copies of the report to every secondary school in the UK as well as to local education authorities and central government. We hope this will highlight the extent of the problem and help to change attitudes.

In addition, we continue to produce quality teaching publications which clearly document safe but exciting approaches to practical work.