Curriculum & assessment

To achieve high-quality science and chemistry education, the curriculum should be engaging, inspiring, and relevant, and assessment should be fit for purpose.

We look at curriculum and assessment matters from the start of primary education right through to the end of secondary school.

Set up in 2014, the Curriculum and Assessment Working Group aims to develop a comprehensive view of an appropriate school chemistry curriculum, from primary to the end of formal school/college education.

The goals are to:

• consider and provide guidance and information on content criteria (including scientific skills and ideas) for chemistry qualifications
• consider and provide guidance and information on appropriate assessment models for chemistry qualifications
• advise on responses to external consultations on curriculum, qualification and assessment matters
• advise the staff, Education Division Council, Science, Education & Industry Board and Council on any matters associated with the chemistry curriculum.

Read more about how we have involved the chemistry community in the development of the science curriculum and in changes to the assessment of the sciences in England.

Higher education

Accelerated degrees: widening student choice in higher education

February 2018

We stressed the need for further analysis and research to be carried out in this area, and whether there was actual demand in the chemical sciences for accelerated degrees.  We highlighted this research should be subject specific and ascertain whether development and provision of programmes with a high level of contact hours would actually cost more.  We also highlighted the potential impact for other areas of academic life such as research and outreach through reduced availability of facilities.  In particular we raised concerns around the overall student experience.

Quality Assessment Review: Future approaches to quality assessment in England, Wales & Northern Ireland

August 2015

We broadly supported the need to change the current system of quality assurance, but expressed a number of concerns over specific details and the implementation of the proposals. We highlighted our support for autonomy of HE institutions, but raised concerns around the suggested mechanisms for consistency across different disciplines at different institutions.

Changes to the assessment of A-levels in the sciences: what do they mean for higher education admissions?

May 2015

Our guide – Changes to the assessment of A-levels in the sciences – explains how those working in higher education admissions can help ensure students receive a rich practical experience at A-level in light of the changes to practical assessment.

England consultations

GCSE reform: regulations for science

May 2015

We questioned the percentages allocated to mathematical skills in the assessment of the different sciences and requested clarification on the measures to ensure students have opportunities to undertake sufficient practical work.

Assessment of practical work in the sciences at GCSE

February 2015

We supported the need to change the current system of assessment but expressed a number of concerns over the implementation of the proposals including appropriate monitoring and the lack of detail provided in the consultation document.

Scotland

Subject choices in the Senior Phase

March 2019

We responded as part of the Learned Societies' Group on Scottish Science Education to the Education and Skills Committee's enquiry into subject choices, which focused specifically on the extent and basis for any narrowing of availability of subject choices.

The response highlighted concerns about narrowing of the curriculum, most notably in S4, and the decline in candidates choosing STEM qualifications.

 Our joint response to the enquiry on subject choices

National Improvement Framework for Scottish education

November 2015

We responded as part of the Learned Societies' Group on Scottish Science Education to the Scottish Government's proposals for a National Improvement Framework (NIF). The response highlighted that the NIF could potentially have negative implications for teaching science.