Urgent Fix for Science Curriculum After Expert Analysis
By ANDREW DENHOLM EDUCATION CORRESPONDENT
THE Scottish Government has ordered urgent changes to the country’s new science curriculum after a damning assessment by leading scientists.
In an interview with The Herald, Fiona Hyslop, the Education Secretary, said published materials for science lessons would be changed following a scathing analysis by the Royal Society of Edinburgh earlier this month.
And she pledged specialists would be allowed to influence reform of other areas of the curriculum, including history, geography, maths and biology.
“The draft science outcomes were the first to be drawn up and they are the ones that have been most criticised and they will be substantially changed, ” said Ms Hyslop.
“We are working very closely with the science community, including the Scottish Science Advisory Committee and the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and they are directly involved in working up examples of how the new framework can be used to improve science education.I’ve asked officials to take on the thoughts of these key interest groups and therefore change and improve the final outcomes.”
The row over science lessons stems from an ongoing review of what is taught in Scotland’s schools – the so-called Curriculum for Excellence. Launched by the former Scottish Executive in 2004, the initiative was set up to examine whether subjects were being taught in a relevant and interesting way and to ensure teaching was not just about passing exams.
Over the past four years, the curriculum body Learning and Teaching Scotland has been producing a series of documents known as “outcomes” which set out what pupils should know at different stages of their school career for each subject area.
Teaching unions have long complained the outcome documents are too vague, but criticism came to a head this month when a working party from the Royal Society of Edinburgh published a damning report on the science and maths outcomes.
Its report said fundamental principles had been ignored, adding: “The outcomes contain hardly any mention of fundamental concepts, laws and methods. Where will the bedrock of understanding come from whereby the next generation of scientists, or even of scientifically aware lay-persons, will be developed?”
Even more worryingly, the report said talks with specialists in other subject areas had thrown up similar concerns. Yesterday, Ms Hyslop, who is consulting with the Institute of Physics, the Bioindustry Association Scotland and the Institute of Biology Scotland, said the government had listened and was preparing to change some of the materials already produced. She insisted there was still widespread support for the values, purposes and principles of the new curriculum, but said other specialists would also be brought on board.
“I see this as subject teachers owning their own territory ” she added.
The move was welcomed by the Royal Society of Edinburgh. General secretary Professor Geoffrey Boulton said: “In response to the encouragement of the Cabinet Secretary, we’ve had a constructive meeting with Learning and Teaching Scotland and the Scottish Government, together with epresentatives of other learned societies, to identify ways in which we can help in attaining the objectives of the Curriculum for Excellence that will command widespread support.”
The attack by the Royal Society of Edinburgh was the latest in a string of concerns that have been voiced In 2005, history teachers said the integrity of subjects could be at risk because of plans to teach in a cross-disciplinary way. And last year, Matthew MacIver, chief executive of the General Teaching Council for Scotland, said the review was at risk of undermining the “underlying rationale and logical framework” of education.
INSIDE Lessons learned P4
Originally published by Newsquest Media Group.
(c) 2008 Herald, The; Glasgow (UK). Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.