Science

2004/5 annual report on curriculum and assessment

This report is based on the activities to investigate curriculum, assessment and qualifications
issues in science

December 2005

QCA/05/2177
Contents

Background 3

The state of the 4–19 science curriculum and qualifications in 4

2004/5

Summary of key findings 6

Foundation stage and key stages 1 and 2 7

Key stage 3 10

14–19 13

Inclusion 16

Evaluation of QCA support and guidance 17

Implications for further consideration 18

Appendix 19

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 2

Background

QCA has a remit to keep the national curriculum under review. It identifies aspects
that would benefit from further development and advises the Secretary of State on
curriculum and assessment matters. To do this effectively it has a programme of
monitoring and evaluation that makes sure advice is soundly based and development
work is informed by practical experiences.

Detailed quantitative evidence is provided by the QCA Monitoring Curriculum and

Assessment (MCA) project. This yields statistical data through questionnaire
responses from a selection of schools at all key stages. QCA also speaks to key
players, holds focus groups and seminars, and undertakes desk research. Advisers
visit schools and colleges to speak with individual teachers and learners and to
examine the curriculum in practice.

In addition, the monitoring programme for science involved distribution of short

questionnaires at speaking engagements attended by QCA science advisers and on
the QCA science web pages. QCA also gathered the views of over 300 pupils on
school science. The main findings have been included in this report, where
appropriate, but a report on pupils’ perspectives will also be published separately.

There are four parts to the monitoring and evaluation programme:

• gathering information about the current situation
• evaluating the nature and validity of local innovations
• evaluating the impact of recent changes at the national level
• informing future advice and action for QCA.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 3

The state of the 4–19 science curriculum and qualifications
in 2004/5

The programme of study for science in England is statutory from ages 5 to 16. The
statutory requirements are set out in the national curriculum, which was last revised
in 2000, with key stage 4 being revised for first teaching in 2006. Science also
features significantly in the ‘knowledge and understanding of the world’ strand of the
foundation stage curriculum.

In the foundation stage, progress has been made through the ‘knowledge and
understanding of the world’ strand, although a variety of support and training needs
to teach and assess it were identified by the science monitoring team.

At key stages 1 and 2, there has been a positive response to the primary national
strategy. In science the secondary national strategy has been extremely positively
received, building on the significant impact reported last year. Results of the end of
key stage tests in science have improved this year, with the numbers of pupils
attaining level 5 or above at key stage 2 and key stage 3 both rising by 4 percentage
points.

Over 80 per cent of students continue to take the double award GCSE in science
(slightly down on last year’s percentage), with the remainder taking either the single
award GCSE or three separate science GCSEs. Entry level qualifications are
available for the small minority who do not reach GCSE standard. The proportion of
students taking the equivalent of two GCSEs in science is not expected to change
after 2006, with many schools opting to take GCSE science and GCSE additional
science instead. Indeed, subject to parliamentary approval, there will be a new
statutory entitlement to offer courses leading to at least two GCSEs in science. The
new GCSEs from 2006 will shift the emphasis towards ‘how science works’.

The changes at key stage 4 will have a direct effect on the other key stages, and
reviews are already under way of the key stage 3 programme of study and post-16
A level criteria, for likely first implementation in 2008.

At AS and A level, numbers of biology, chemistry and psychology candidates

continue to rise, following last year’s trend. However, also following last year’s trend,
the numbers of candidates taking AS and A level physics continue to decline. The
trends in the Advanced Vocational Certificate of Education (AVCE) in science also

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 4

continued, with the numbers of candidates taking single science up and the number
taking double science down. September 2005 sees the replacement of AVCE with a
new AS/A level in Applied Science award.

ICT continues to have a positive impact on science teaching and learning, although
there are still some factors restricting teachers’ use of ICT in science, including
access to ICT suites, insufficient hardware and appropriate training. Science
specialist schools were significantly more likely than non-specialist schools to use
ICT to support and enhance science teaching.

Out-of-classroom activities continue to be valued by science teachers and

departments, although this year’s report touches on some of the issues that constrain
any further expansion of these activities in schools, including the administrative
burden, cost implications and health and safety concerns.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 5

Summary of key findings

• There has been no overall improvement in pupils’ grasp of key scientific

vocabulary at key stage 1 and 2. This is likely to have a knock-on effect at key
stages 3 and 4.

• ICT issues continue to hinder progress in many schools, and ignorance of website
information means that many are not accessing valuable resources.

• Sc1 (scientific enquiry) continues to be an area that needs further attention at key
stage 3 and will need to be considered during the transition to the new science
GCSEs in 2006.

• Workload, resource and training implications were the most commonly expressed
concerns in relation to the new GCSEs being introduced for first teaching in 2006.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 6

Foundation stage and key stages 1 and 2

General: time and manageability

The majority of respondents this year had primary class sizes of 26–30 pupils at key
stages 1 and 2. Almost half said that class size has a negative impact on the science
work undertaken in their school at key stage 1, although the proportion was slightly
less at key stage 2. In addition, almost half said that, because of the negative impact
of the class size, science experiments undertaken by pupils were limited.

A very small number of respondents reported staff shortages or subject specialism

issues regarding the teaching of science in their schools. Among this small number,
the most significant area they felt was lacking was practical science work.

Curriculum
In the foundation stage, around half of the respondents had no difficulties teaching
the science aspects in the ‘knowledge and understanding of the world’ early learning
goal. The difficulties experienced by the remainder were varied, without showing a
significant trend, and included ‘concerns about the potential overlap with key stage 1
science’ and ‘competing demands on time from other learning goals’.

The majority of respondents in the foundation stage said that they could provide out-
of-classroom activities relating to science on the school site. Factors preventing or
constraining the use of off-site or out-of-classroom activities at key stages 1 and 2
included the ‘administrative burden’ (most frequently selected at key stage 2 by over
a quarter of respondents), ‘cost implications’ (nearly a third) and ‘demand on time to
cover science content’ (a fifth).

Teachers also felt that they needed ‘more examples of how to combine and link the
teaching of science with other subjects’.

The impact of national initiatives and other developments on science teaching

and learning
Overall, the response regarding the primary national strategy was extremely positive.
The positive gains in literacy that were most frequently stated by the respondents
were improvements in children’s reading skills (two-thirds at key stage 1) and oral
skills (half at key stage 1). However, no respondents included ‘grasp of key scientific
vocabulary’ as an improvement or positive impact, which may have a knock-on effect
at key stages 3 and 4 unless addressed.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 7

Gains in mathematics were more uniform, with significant numbers of respondents
agreeing that there had been a positive impact regarding ‘measuring skills and use of
measuring equipment’, ‘collection, handling and interpretation of data’, ‘drawing and
interpretation of graphs and charts’ and ‘reading of scales’.

Just as last year, a significant minority of respondents felt that ‘science being
allocated to the afternoon slots only’ was having the largest negative effect (around a
quarter of responses). However, in marked contrast to previous years, there seemed
to be little feeling that there should be a science strand to the primary national
strategy. This may be a direct result of the renaming of the primary national strategy
this year.

When asked about their training needs in primary science, over two-thirds of
respondents at key stage 1 said they would welcome training in Sc1 ideas and
evidence and Sc1 investigative skills. Other training areas with high responses (over
half of the respondents) at key stage 1 included ‘science teaching and assessment
through the use of ICT in science’ and ‘summative assessment in science’.

These trends continued into key stage 2, where the most frequently selected areas
for further training were Sc1 investigative skills and ICT in science. Additionally,
devising appropriate activities and assessments for out-of-classroom teaching and
fieldwork in science was frequently mentioned.

Transfer and transition

The secondary national strategy’s transfer unit entitled ‘Curriculum continuity –
effective transfer between primary and secondary schools’ continues to be useful,
with approximately a third of all respondents indicating this. One comment was that it
‘improved links between primary and secondary, and smoother transition’. However,
one concern expressed was: ‘Teachers have used and enjoyed the transfer units.
However, there is concern that it will not be continued when the pupils get to
secondary school.’

In the foundation stage, respondents almost unanimously said that the 9-point scale
for ‘knowledge and understanding of the world’ had not been useful in helping to plan
for children’s progression from the foundation stage into year 1. Unfortunately,
suggested improvements were few and diverse, and therefore QCA may need to
consider further work to clarify this.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 8

Use of ICT in the science curriculum
Over half of the primary respondents use ‘some’ or ‘a lot’ of ICT, slightly less than last
year, but it was still felt that ICT has a positive impact on science teaching and
learning.

Limited access to ICT suites was the most frequently chosen factor limiting or
preventing the use of ICT in respondents’ schools, with almost half of the key stage 2
respondents stating it as a factor.

The following graph compares teachers’ and pupils’ use of different ICT tools at key
stages 1 and 2, as reported by the respondents. Some interesting findings emerge.
For example, using the internet for research was the most popular ICT tool in science
among teachers and pupils at key stages 1 and 2, with around three-quarters using it
overall, although it was used by more teachers in key stage 1 than in key stage 2 and
by more pupils in key stage 2 than in key stage 1. Use of digital cameras also
featured highly.

Figure 1: Percentage of students who use ICT tools at key stages 1 and 2

100
90
80
70
Teachers at KS1
60
Teachers at KS2
50
Pupils at KS1
40
Pupils at KS2
30
20
10
0
PowerPoint
Internet for

Digital cameras
Sensing/monitoring

Digital microscope

Interactive
whiteboard
Word processing

Graphing software
experiments
research

Virtual
data loggers

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 9

Key stage 3

General: time and manageability

The average class size most commonly reported at key stage 3 was 26–30. Around
two-thirds of teachers said that class size in their school has a negative impact on the
science work undertaken at this key stage. Once again, pupils’ experiments were the
worst hit, followed by discipline problems and differentiation issues as the second
and third most commonly cited impacts. The amount of time allocated was the same
as in the previous year: around three hours in years 7 and 8, rising to between three
and four hours in year 9. Significantly, just over half of the respondents stated that
the time allocation was sufficient to cover the key stage 3 science programme of
study well.

Two-fifths of respondents stated that in their school there were staff shortages and/or
subject specialism issues for the teaching of key stage 3 science, with nearly a third
of the total respondents stating Sc4 (physical processes) as a particular area with
shortages, compared with one-quarter citing Sc3 (materials and their properties).

Curriculum
Sc1 was the aspect of the key stage 3 programme of study that was most frequently
omitted or not covered as well as one would like. Around a quarter of respondents
identified this as the main issue. Indeed, over half of the teachers who were asked
about this said that Sc1 was an area that they experienced some difficulty in
teaching. This issue needs to be addressed, given the increased emphasis from
2006 on ‘how science works’ in key stage 4.

QCA has been given a remit this year to review the key stage 3 programme of study
in the light of the changes to key stage 4 in 2006. It is therefore interesting to note
that popular suggestions from teachers to improve the key stage 3 programme of
study included ‘provide examples of links to the world of work’ (three-quarters) and
‘provide more examples and link the teaching of science with other subjects at key
stage 3’ (nearly half).

Out-of-classroom activities continue to thrive at key stage 3, with a majority of

schools stating that they carried out science activities on the school site, but, perhaps
more notably, only a quarter stating that they had visits to sites outside the school.
Once again, the administrative burden, cost implications and health and safety
concerns were the most often cited reasons.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 10

The impact of national initiatives and other developments on science teaching
and learning
The secondary national strategy continues to be influential in improving teaching and
learning at key stage 3. Highlights include improvements to science schemes of
work, adoption of a three-part lesson structure and adopting a variety of teaching
styles. Significantly fewer key stage 4 teachers than key stage 3 teachers said it
affected improvements in science teaching and assessment practices or in setting
more specific objectives, but these responses still positively reflect the breadth of
impact that the secondary national strategy is having in schools.

QCA’s MCA project reported similar positive responses to the secondary national
strategy, with almost all respondents agreeing that the strategy approaches have
become a positive part of science teaching and learning, and that involvement in the
strategy had improved staff development in their department. Nearly half also agreed
that the strategy has raised the profile of science within the school.

The impact of developments in assessment

As in previous years, science teachers use ‘assessment at the end of science units’
and ‘task/test at the beginning of science units to gauge what pupils already know’.
Responses demonstrate that most teachers also use assessments for a variety of
purposes, including ‘to track progress’, ‘for target setting’ and ‘for diagnostic
purposes’. Assessing progress in science, now in most secondary schools, combined
with the influence of the secondary national strategy, supports this.

Level descriptions remain an issue for many teachers and science departments. The
majority of respondents’ concerns centre on the language of the level descriptions,
which is too complicated for pupils. There was also a general feeling, continuing from
previous years, that there is a tendency towards over-assessment.

Use of ICT in the science curriculum

ICT in key stage 3, as elsewhere, continues to have a positive impact on science
teaching and learning. However, there also continues to be a lack of sufficient ICT
resources in many schools. Indeed, limited access to ICT suites was the most
influential factor limiting or preventing the use of ICT in school.

Pupils use ICT in science for internet research more than teachers do. This also
applies to graphing software and digital cameras. Also, generic tools or approaches
that can easily be applied to most areas of science feature highly (such as word

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 11

processing, internet research and PowerPoint). Another interesting finding is the
discrepancy between pupils’ use of digital cameras and their use of digital
microscopes.

The following graph compares use of different areas or tools in ICT at key stage 3.

Figure 1: Percentage of students who use ICT tools at key stage 3

100
90
80
70
60
Teachers at KS3
50
Pupils at KS3
40
30
20
10
0
Internet for

Virtual experiments
Sensing/monitoring
PowerPoint

Digital cameras
Graphing software

Digital microscope

Interactive
whiteboard
Word processing

research

data loggers

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 12

14–19

General: time and manageability

In comparison with previous years, there were no significant changes or patterns
regarding the time allocation at key stage 4, with 2.5 hours being most common for
the single award and five or more hours for both double and triple awards. In QCA’s
MCA findings, 5 per cent of respondents said they had reduced their time allocation
for science to accommodate time increases elsewhere within the timetable.

In spite of this, most centres felt that their time allocation was sufficient to cover the
current key stage 4 programme of study for single and double award science. Not
surprisingly, only just over a third of respondents said the time allocation for triple
science was sufficient. Among those who felt that the time allocation was insufficient,
Sc1 was the area that was most commonly omitted or not covered well. This has
significant implications for the changes to key stage 4 science in 2006, and centres
need to be made aware of the change in focus towards ‘how science works’.

Curriculum
The current coursework assessment continues to be an inappropriate form of
assessment at key stage 4 for many. Interestingly, the possible alternative
approaches that were suggested were varied and included:
• ‘practical skills assessment’
• ‘portfolio of a range of work’
• ‘the criteria for awarding marks should be changed’
• ‘more open-ended with less jumping though hoops – genuinely investigative’, and
• ‘wide range of activities needed’.

All of these suggestions are reflected in the different GCSE specifications available
for first teaching in 2006.

However, it was also noted that most teachers felt that there were sufficient
opportunities for practical work in the single award course but that less than half felt
this was the case for the double award and separate science courses. The most
commonly cited reasons for not having sufficient opportunities for practical work were
‘not enough time or too much content to cover’ and ‘health and safety requirements
too stringent’.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 13

Nearly two-thirds of respondents also felt that pupils found some science skills in the
current key stage 4 programme of study particularly demanding, most notably the
skill of evaluating.

Out-of-class science activities continue, with half of the teachers taking year 10
students on visits, both within the school grounds and off-site. This figure falls slightly
in year 11, as expected, but it is encouraging to note that over four-fifths of year 12
and 13 students have out-of-classroom visits.

It is still the case that the main reasons why out-of-classroom, off-site activities are
prevented are the administrative burden, lack of funding, health and safety concerns
and demands on time to cover science content.

Changes to key stage 4 science in 2006

Early indications are that half of centres are intending to increase the range of GCSE
science courses that they will offer from 2006. This indicates that the message of
increased flexibility offered to schools is getting through. This number is expected to
increase, as more centres become aware of the possibilities, read the guidance
booklet that QCA has developed and attend relevant INSET. It is worth noting that,
currently, about one-third of centres said they expected to implement minimal change
to meet the new key stage 4 programme of study.

It is interesting to note that the majority of teachers questioned did not identify any
new aspects of the programme of study that would be particularly difficult or
conceptually demanding. Rather, concerns focused on workload and resource
implications, as the table below indicates:

Workload implications 82%

Resource implications 71%
Training implications 64%
Choosing the right course from the greater range 56%
Advance notice of changes 54%
Staffing implications 49%
Managing/coping with new methods of assessment 49%

However, a significant minority of teachers did indicate that ‘how science works’
would require some support to implement. This echoes the Sc1 findings at key
stage 3 and is an issue that needs addressing if the key stage 4 changes are to be
implemented successfully.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 14

Use of ICT in the science curriculum
As in all other key stages, ICT is continuing to have a positive impact on science
teaching, including the use of interactive whiteboards with the internet to clarify
science concepts and to increase pupils’ motivation and attentiveness.

Limited access to ICT suites and insufficient hardware continue to be influential

factors limiting the use of ICT in schools for just over half of the respondents.

The graph below compares the respondents’ use of different areas or tools in ICT at
key stage 4. The patterns are similar to those at key stage 3, although it is sad that
fewer pupils use digital cameras, digital microscopes and interactive white boards at
key stage 4 than at key stage 3.

Figure 1: Percentage of students who use ICT tools at key stage 4

100
90
80
70
60
Teachers at KS4
50
Pupils at KS4
40
30
20
10
0
Internet for

Virtual experiments
Sensing/monitoring
PowerPoint

Graphing software

Digital cameras

Digital microscope

Interactive
whiteboard
Word processing

research

data loggers

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 15

Inclusion

The MCA project showed that over three-quarters of science teachers said they
made activities accessible to pupils with special needs through using different
learning activities, by presenting activities in different ways and through the use of a
teaching assistant. Just over half of responding schools felt they had adapted the
science curriculum to suit different groups of pupils.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 16

Evaluation of QCA support and guidance

Most teachers are now finding the QCA website more useful than in previous years.
The science subject pages (www.qca.org.uk/science), which were launched last
autumn, are now the third most used area of all science areas on QCA curriculum
websites .

Interestingly, the popularity of email alerts has risen slightly from last year, and QCA
is now working on producing a termly update in science in response.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 17

Implications for further consideration

Although, in contrast to previous years, support for a science strand to the primary
national strategy was not widespread, the secondary national strategy could usefully
build on the excellent work that has been done at key stage 3 and in transition
projects to develop and support primary science teachers. This work should also be
supported by the National Advisers and Inspectors Group for Science (NAIGS) and
local authorities, who have many examples of good practice that must be more
widely shared. The Association for Science Education (ASE) and Science Learning
Centres (SLCs) could also take a lead in this area.

This report’s findings concerning ICT need further investigation, and QCA will focus
on ICT in science over the coming months, alongside the development of some
specific web pages on ICT in science and resources on www.qca.org.uk/science.

QCA needs to further promote communication of available resources, for example

through email alerts. There is strong evidence that specialist science schools are
making more effective use of ICT to support teaching and learning in science
lessons. The Specialist Schools and Academies Trust needs to share this good
practice more widely to promote the effective use of ICT. QCA and other
stakeholders need to support this work through highlighting these cases of
excellence.

QCA needs to work closely with the secondary national strategy, NAIGS, local
authorities, the SLCs and Ofsted to address issues surrounding the implementation
of new science GCSEs from 2006. Work will begin at the key stage 4 autumn
conferences this year (in association with NAIGS, Ofsted and the secondary national
strategy), and schools are being further supported with a 24-page guide to
implementation of the new GCSEs and web-based support. However, further, longer-
term collaboration is needed over the coming months and years to ensure that
successful implementation and a thorough evaluation will take place. Liaison and
collaboration with other stakeholders (such as the Teacher Development Agency and
the Royal Society and other learned institutions) is also necessary.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 18

Appendix

Areas of enquiry
The following general and science-specific areas of enquiry were monitored in
2004/5:
• foundation and early years
• the curriculum and key stage 1–4 science programmes of study (time allocation
and manageability; any difficulties in teaching specific aspects of the science
programme of study across the key stages and aspects omitted due to pressure
on time; and ICT use in science)
• the impact of national initiatives on science teaching and learning) the Literacy
and Numeracy Strategies and the Key Stage 3 Science Strategy)
• the impact of developments in assessment
• the impact of developments in qualifications
• other science-specific issues (out-of-classroom science activities and fieldwork)

Sources and methodologies

A range of methods was used to invite individuals to provide responses to
questionnaires, including web-based forms and the distribution of questionnaires at
speaking engagements attended by the QCA science advisers. The questionnaires
focused on the following:

For teachers
• foundation stage
• key stage 1 and 2; key stage 2 (tests)
• key stage 3 (parts 1 and 2); key stage 3 (tests)
• key stage 4 (parts 1 and 2)
• post-16

For pupils
• foundation stage, key stage 1 and 2
• key stage 3
• key stage 4
• post-16

Further information was obtained through meetings and consultation with NAIGS, the
Association for Science Education (ASE), DfES, Ofsted, the secondary national

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 19

strategy, the Royal Society, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Institute of Physics
and the Institute of Biology.

QCA materials produced in current year and work in progress

September sees the publication of a 24-page guide on implementing the new GCSEs
from 2006 and the publication of the revised Science national curriculum document.

Both the key stage 3 programme of study and post-16 GCE criteria are currently
under review. QCA will be canvassing views via online questionnaires and discussion
forums and seminars. Contribute to the review by e-mailing science@qca.org.uk.

QCA is grateful for the thousand or so responses to the questionnaires posted on our
website this year at www.qca.org.uk/science. For further information on this report,
please e-mail science@qca.org.uk.

© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2005 20