As no one else has stuck their head above the parapet and admitted to actually teaching science...
A big chunk of the primary curriculum is about designing 'fair tests' and evaluating results, as well as producing critiques of other experiments and conclusions.
We didn't do that when we were at primary school. Sometimes I wonder if that's part of the problem- that we're trying to get kids to do these things at an age when they'd really rather be doing labelled diagrams of volcanoes.
Sometimes, we just put a big pile of apparatus in the middle of the table and let them get on with it. We circulate, ask "What happens if...?" and remove the funnel from the boy who thinks it ought to go up his nose, but that's about it.
And absolutely yes, we do let them fail. And we respect unexpected results. This term we've had plants with their roots removed that grew better than those with roots intact, and sandy soil that has absorbed more water than clay soil.
As far as I'm concerned, that gives us (the adults) a chance to model behaviour when experiments don't concur with predictions. That is, we're intrigued rather than defensive...
There are rather a lot of us out here doing our best...sigh...
</weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth>
I'll admit this diary may make more sense to readers of a certain age who grew up drawing labelled diagrams of volcanoes. (Or in my case, sneaking out of fingerpainting classes to go find interesting books in the library.)
But how long have the changes been in place, and has it made a difference to perceptions of science?
And what happens at secondary school?
(I can't get much out of my daughter beyond "Boring" and a deep resentment that her teacher's idea of 'fun' today in the last lesson of term was a worksheet...I found it difficult to summon enthusiasm, however, when she brought home two plastic cups of cress seeds/cotton wool, one of which had to be given water and one not. I've done that experiment with seven year olds.)
The National Curriculum was introduced in 1988, so anyone 24 or younger will have had their entire school career under its aegis. As there's been a decline in takeup of science A levels in that period, it doesn't appear to be enthusing children about science.
One thing I find interesting is that, although science is popularly believed to be difficult, the science SAT at age 11 is the 'easiest', ie schools generally achieve a higher pass rate in science than in English or maths...
Maybe we should be pointing this out more enthusiastically?
