Ofsted have just released their latest research report into Science teaching.
Here’s a summary of the main findings and recommendations.
Recommendations from the Report
Curriculum
- Ensure the content taught in Reception is detailed as explicitly as it is for KS1 and KS2. Make better connections between Reception content and what pupils are taught in KS1.
- Plan the KS3 curriculum to build on what has been learned previously. Don’t repeat KS2 content unnecessarily.
- Build time into the curriculum for pupils to learn and remember key knowledge.
- Explicitly teach how new content links to pre-existing schema so that pupils build connected knowledge.
- Identify and sequence the disciplinary knowledge pupils need to work scientifically. This should include the full range of outcomes from the National Curriculum. This also includes some of the concepts which might not be explicitly stated but are inherent within working scientifically e.g independent variable, dependent variable, control variable etc
- Ensure that all pupils have opportunities to take part in high-quality practical work with a clear purpose.
- Ensure that the science curriculum is planned to take account of what pupils learn in other subjects, particularly mathematics.
Pedagogy and Assessment
- Teacher explanations should use pupils’ prior learning so that meaningful connections can be made between new content and knowledge from across the curriculum.
- Schools should ensure content has been learned before moving on to new content. This includes deliberately checking whether pupils have specific misconceptions.
- Schools should choose appropriate teaching and learning approaches based on the content being taught.
- Schools should assess that both substantive and disciplinary knowledge from previous years has been remembered. This includes, where relevant, that pupils can use their knowledge to select, plan and carry out different types of scientific enquiry.
Systems at subject and school level
- Schools should create a systematic and continuous approach to developing staff expertise in science, taking into account the context of the individual school and teaching team.
- Schools should support subject leaders to prioritise curriculum time for teaching key scientific knowledge. Reduce pressure to simply cover content and move on.
Main findings
- Most schools provided an ambitious science curriculum, mainly focused on developing pupils’ knowledge of substantive concepts such as ‘habitats’, ‘forces’ and ‘materials’.
- Science was strong in most schools. Pupils had a detailed and connected knowledge of the curriculum, and remembered what they had learned previously.
- A tiny minority of schools were not developing secure knowledge of science in their pupils with the focus on covering the content, rather than ensuring it was learned.
- There were a small minority of primary schools where pupils went for entire half-term blocks without learning any science. Pupils were unable to benefit from regular opportunities to revisit and build on their knowledge.
- Some pupils came out of lockdown with significant gaps in their scientific knowledge, and COVID-19 prevented primary and secondary colleagues from working together to support pupils’ transition.
- There was too much focus on developing pupils’ disciplinary knowledge at the expense of how to develop their substantive knowledge. Not enough consideration was given to identifying the disciplinary knowledge that is needed to work scientifically. Too often, the focus was simply on identifying practical activities for pupils to complete.
- There were large differences in the amount of practical work taking place in schools. For example, pupils in primary school were much more likely to take part in hands-on practical activities than pupils in secondary school. Teachers rarely used demonstrations.
- There were not always sufficient opportunities for pupils to practise and consolidate what is learned before moving on to new content. Some schools would rely on pupils catching up when the content was repeated later in the curriculum, rather than ensuring it was learned the first time.
- Overall, most leaders saw their school science curriculum as a description of what pupils needed to know and do and had planned the curriculum carefully so that pupils studied content in a logical order. However, leaders generally did not see the curriculum as something that could make learning science easier. For example, very few leaders had planned their science curriculum to take account of what pupils learned in mathematics and rarely did science curricula help pupils to avoid misconceptions.
- Some secondary schools incorrectly assumed that pupils learned little science in primary school and repeated unnecessary content in KS3.
- In some primary schools, the knowledge of the natural world that children were expected to learn in Reception was not clear enough with just general topic areas or activities planned. This limited how effectively children were prepared for learning science in Year 1.
- Teachers generally had secure subject knowledge. Clear explanations from teachers, alongside carefully selected teaching activities, supported the learning of specific content and played a key role in helping pupils to learn science.
- Teachers rarely drew on evidence-based, subject-specific approaches when teaching science. Very few schools had a clear plan of how teachers’ knowledge of science, and how to teach it, was developed over time through continuing professional development (CPD).
- Post-pandemic, most CPD courses, were primarily based on developing their knowledge of physics (if they were non-specialists in this discipline) or practical work.
- Subject leaders played a crucial role in developing school science curriculums and supporting teachers to teach them. However, not all subject leaders had access to dedicated leadership time and subject leadership training.
- Many subject leaders were improving and developing their school’s science curriculum.
- In some schools, assessment as learning was sometimes taking place at the expense of assessment for learning. Some pupils were asked to recall knowledge that they had not successfully learned first time around.
- Generally, assessment in science did not check whether pupils had remembered what they had learned in previous years. This was a particular concern in some primary schools, where generalised judgements at the end of a piece of learning were being made against age-related expectations, but what these grades represented in relation to the curriculum was not clear.
- In some schools, there was not enough focus on checking whether pupils had learned the disciplinary knowledge that is needed to work scientifically. These schools only focused on checking that pupils had learned substantive knowledge. This was more common in primary schools.
Key Terms Used
- Substantive knowledge: refers to the established knowledge produced by science, for example, the parts of a flower or the names of planets in our solar system. This is referred to as ‘scientific knowledge’ and ‘conceptual understanding’ in the national curriculum.
- Disciplinary knowledge: refers to what pupils learn about how to establish and refine scientific knowledge, for example by carrying out practical procedures. By identifying and sequencing this knowledge, it is possible to plan in the curriculum for how pupils will get better at working scientifically throughout their time at school.
- Practical Work: ‘any teaching and learning activity which at some point involves the students in observing or manipulating the objects and materials they are studying’. Practical work in this report can refer to a teacher demonstration or a hands-on practical activity for students.
PDF Summary
Access the full OFSTED report here
The post Summary of Ofsted’s Science Subject Report 2023: Finding the Optimum appeared first on Danny Nic’s Science Fix. Written by Danny Nicholson