Written evidence submitted by The Association
for Science Education Outdoor Science Working Group (Sch Sci 39)
The Association for Science Education (ASE)
is the largest subject association in the UK. Members include
teachers, technicians and others involved in science education.
The Association plays a significant role in promoting excellence
in teaching and learning of science in schools and colleges. Working
closely with the science professional bodies, industry and business,
ASE provides a UK-wide network bringing together individuals and
organisations to share ideas and tackle challenges in science
teaching, develop resources and foster high quality Continuing
Professional Development. The Association for Science Education
can trace its origins back to 1900. Incorporated by Royal Charter
in October 2004, the ASE operates as a Registered Charity.
The Outdoor Science Working Group (OSWG) was
convened by ASE in 2004 in response to a long and continuing decline
in the use of outdoor fieldwork to teach science in the UK's schools,
particularly at secondary level. The OSWG feels that this is detrimental
to the quality of science education and reduces the opportunities
for children to appreciate everything that science has to offer
them, both as future citizens and potential recruits to science
careers. The ASE OSWG is chaired by ASE, and includes representatives
from university science education departments including King's
College London, Keele, Birmingham and Southampton, and science
education bodies such as Field Studies Council (FSC), Science
and Plants in Schools (SAPS) and British Ecological Society (BES).
1. This response is submitted in addition to the
SCORE response covering practical work and fieldwork in science,
to which ASE contributed as a member organisation of SCORE.
2. This response focuses on fieldwork aspects and
draws on two reports from ASE's OSWG in 2011[63]
and 2007[64].
This response is informed by evidence from members of ASE's OSWG
and their organisations together with an ASE survey of science
teachers and others involved in science education. The survey
evidence presented here is a summary of responses from 388 teachers
who contributed to an online survey carried out by ASE in 2011[65].
90% of respondents were secondary school teachers in England,
with subject teaching equally divided across science disciplines
(35% Physics; 33% Chemistry; 32% Biology).These data have not
been published previously.
Are science field trips in decline? If they are,
what are the reasons for the decline?
3. The survey data indicates there is a huge range
in provision between schools, ranging from regular trips for most
years to none at all. Whereas most teachers (67%) thought that
the level of provision had remained the same as previous years,
a significant minority (29%) felt that it had declined. Only 4%
thought that it had increased. Stated reasons for the decline
included inadequate time available for planning and taking students
out of classroom, disruption to school timetables and increasingly,
a lack of funding.
4. Elsewhere, there is strong evidence from a variety
of sources including a survey in 2010 indicating a decline in
the number and duration of biological fieldtrips over the past
40 years.[66]
5. The survey data indicates that 33% of respondents
feel inexperience of teachers in carrying out practical work is
an issue and 22% indicated that they would welcome more professional
development opportunities to develop their confidence with practical
work. ASE's OSWG has consistently identified that there is a shortage
of secondary science teachers with the confidence, competence
and commitment to lead fieldwork. In response, the ASE OSWG has
released two reports[67]
which have made recommendations to remedy this shortage.
How important are field trips in science education?
6. Over two thirds (68.3%) of teachers feel that
field trips are important or very important. Table 1 summarises
the overall responses.
| Secondary | Primary
|
| n=199 | n=11
|
| Very Important | 29.1% |
0.0% |
| Important | 39.2% | 81.8%
|
| Mildly Important | 22.6% |
18.2% |
| Not Important | 4.0% | 0.0%
|
| Table 1. 2011 ASE teachers' survey. How important are field trips in science education?
|
7. The importance of field trips is also evidenced both through
the level of activity (see Figure 1) that is going on, but also
the strength of accompanying statements.
Figure 1. ASE 2011 survey. How many
field trips have you undertaken or intend to carry out in the
2010/2011 academic year?
EXEMPLAR STATEMENTS
8. "My fondest memories of my A level course
were the field trips and they formed my desire for science and
to teach. They are about seeing science in context and not in
theory, whether it is seaweed on a rocky shore, fossils in a quarry
or the Haber process in a chemical plant. Good field trips are
more than discovery; they are also about teamwork, leadership
and other personal skills."
9. "Field trips show that science is for real
and not just something that is done at school. They give a greater
understanding of the world of science. They can help generate
more interest and can help spark the less interested students.
They can show students a possible way forward for careers. They
can help students understand the real world around them."
10. "Out of classroom science enables pupils
to understand the complexity of the real world and how it can
be investigated. It provides opportunities for learning how to
observe, raise questions, investigate in contexts where there
is often not a "right answer" and deal with "messy"
data (data that shows variation and therefore consideration needs
to be given as to its quality). Many real world issues involve
such "messy" data - it is important that students learn
that evidence is seldom as clear cut as in a contrived lab-based
experiment. Uncertainty in data is inevitable and students need
to learn that this is inherent in science and not the fault of
the scientists "doing it wrong"."
11. "Field trips allow pupils to experience
environments and activities that they may not otherwise have access
to (due to socio-economic factors, location, etc). Field trips
encourage pupils to develop an appreciation of the environment
and the need for environmental conservation and sustainability.
Field trips to museums and workplaces allow pupils to learn about
science in context and provide future opportunities for STEM careers."
12. The survey data indicates that field trips involve
all age phases (activity as a proportion of total secondary school
field trips are shown in brackets below), but also notes with
concern that barriers are most pronounced at GCSE (Key Stage 4)
level:
— Key
Stage 3 (34%)
— Key
Stage 4 (22%)
— A level,
16-19 (46%).
13. Field trips can occur at any time of the academic
year (activity as a proportion of total secondary school field
trips are shown in brackets below), but most activity is disproportionately
placed in the post exam period in Summer Term, mainly because
of exam and timetabling constraints, and the increased availability
of cover staff:
— Autumn
Term (17%)
— Spring
term (16%)
— Summer
Term (67%).
14. A wide range of sites and activities are
being used by UK teachers, which include (in declining order,
with number of references in brackets):
— Ecology
sites/local habitats (including school grounds) (63)
— Field
Centres (28)
— Museums
(21)
— Wildlife
park/zoos (19)
— Science/technology
centres (19)
— Space
centres (incl. CERN) (16)
— Universities
(15)
— Industry
(16)
— Farms
(8)
— Botanical
gardens (5).
Others (<5) included: hospitals, powers stations,
theme parks, research labs, mines and quarries, aquaria, reservoir,
army barracks and a recycling plant.
What part do health and safety concerns play in
preventing school pupils from going on field trips? What rules
and regulations apply to field trips and how are they being interpreted?
16. Table 2 below summarises the responses of teachers
to the barriers to practical work. It is likely that health and
safety concerns will be more prominent when considering field
trips and these undoubtedly act as a deterrent. However, a large
number of written responses identified the administration and
paperwork - including the need to find and fund staff cover -
as the main obstacles, rather than the health and safety risks
themselves.
How much of a barrier do you consider these issues
to be when deciding whether to carry out practical work in science
at your school?
| | Greatest Barrier
| Less of a Barrier | Not a Barrier
| Response counts |
| Resources and facilities | 36.6% (111)
| 41.3% (125) | 22.1% (67) |
303 |
| Teachers' inexperience | 32.6% (99)
| 41.4% (126) | 26.0% (79) |
304 |
| Health and safety | 15.8% (48)
| 53.3% (162) | 30.9% (94) |
304 |
| Technical support | 21.8% (66)
| 45.2% (137) | 33.0% (100) |
303 |
| Exams and assessment | 45.2% (137)
| 38.3% (116) | 16.5% (50) |
303 |
| Pupils' behaviour | 37.9% (114)
| 43.2% (130) | 18.9% (57) |
301 |
| Curriculum (content and resources) | 38.5% (116)
| 49.5% (149) | 12.0% (36) |
301 |
| Time | 52.1% (158) | 37.3% (113)
| 10.6% (32) | 303 |
| CPD Provision | 15.9% (47) |
52.2% (154) | 31.9% (94) | 295
|
| Answered question 306
Skipped question 82
Others please specify 31
|
Table 2 ASE survey 2011
17. ASE's OSWG welcomes many of the findings of Lord Young's Review[68]
and his proposals to simplify the process that schools and other
organisations undertake before taking children on outdoor learning
experiences.
Do examination boards adequately recognise science field trips?
18. The survey data indicates that nearly three quarters (71%)
of the teachers who expressed an opinion (Yes or No, n=160) felt
that examination boards did not adequately recognise the work
carried out on field trips (71%, n=160). It was noted that some
awarding organisations had stronger recommendations than others.
Some commented that a stronger recommendation would support a
greater take up of field trips.
19. Elsewhere evidence links the amount of fieldwork to curriculum
and assessment. Fieldwork has not been compulsory in the national
curriculum for science, unlike geography. As a result, geography
numbers have grown for the Field Studies Council courses over
20 years, replacing science as the major contributing subject
to Field Studies Council visitor numbers. Geography teachers are
twice as likely to do residential fieldwork at Key Stage 3, and
ten times more likely at GCSE level; they were also twice as likely
to do local fieldwork at both levels.[69]
If the quality or number of field trips is declining, what
are the consequences for science education and career choices?
For example, what effects are there on the performance and achievement
of pupils and students in Higher Education?
20. The OSWG believes that a continuing decline in field trips
will lead to a downward spiral in provision. For example, an increasing
the number of science graduates who lack prior experience in fieldwork
will reduce the number of trainee and early career science teachers
with the confidence, competence and commitment to teach fieldwork
themselves.
21. A reduction in field trips will affect the quality of science
education - for example weakening the opportunities to observe
and practice the learning of science in the context of the "real
world", reducing the chances of a wider range of learners
to fulfill their potential and weakening the development of critical
skills such as data handling and analysis. The main sources of
inspiration and motivation for some students will disappear, thus
reducing potential recruitment to the UK's science knowledge base.
22. This is of particular concern with the pressing need to address
the world's major environmental challenges. It is noted that the
UKCES4 report[70] highlights
the areas of conservation and environmental protection as being
one of the biggest growth areas in terms of employment over the
last 10 years. By 2020, approximately 4% of the work force will
be involved in "green jobs" in a variety of capacities
with education standards including level 2-4 and beyond 5; many
of which will include elements of fieldwork. Similarly, the NERC
funded ERFF report 7[71]
highlights fieldwork as being one of it's ten most wanted skills
required for the next ten years, highlighting a decline in the
knowledge base in this area.
What changes should be made?
23. The evidence from this research and earlier ASE OSWG-hosted
national workshops points to the wide-ranging educational benefits
of teaching and learning science through fieldwork in the natural
and built environments. These benefits are widely recognised;[72]
yet despite the strengths and advantages that fieldwork can bring
to teaching at all ages, there has been a decline in the provision
and condition of outdoor education in science. ASE's OSWG believes
that this trend is detrimental to science education.
24. The recommendations below will provide a strong foundation
for a shared and coherent approach towards increased uptake and
improved quality of teaching and learning through fieldwork in
science education.
Recommendation 1
Reviews of initial teacher training, Qualified Teacher Status
standards and continuing professional development such as the
current independent review of qualifications to raise the standards
of teaching, led by Sally Coates, must ensure that fieldwork training
is expected and provided for all trainee science teachers. All
trainee science teachers should be expected to prepare and lead
at least one fieldwork session themselves, and to take part in
a fieldwork trip. A co-coordinated programme of teacher training
in fieldwork should therefore be established to promote effective
pedagogy for all university tutors and school teachers involved
in pre-service and early career training.
Recommendation 2
A dedicated outdoor science web-site, aimed at teachers,
technicians and outdoor educators, should be created to signpost,
exchange and compare high-quality fieldwork training resources.
The website should encompass local and context-specific support
and include contacts for expert advisers, local support networks,
existing good practice, training events and fieldwork providers
as well as published materials.
Recommendation 3
Performance management and designations (for example, to AST or
Excellent Teacher level) should include an opportunity for
early-career teachers to demonstrate their effective use of fieldwork
and for more experienced teachers to demonstrate their own role
in providing fieldwork training for colleagues in other departments
and schools (including across age phases and transitions).
Recommendation 4
Awarding bodies should be provided with the flexibility and support
to significantly increase open-ended summative assessment
and assessments that recognise skills which are primarily developed
through fieldwork.
Recommendation 5
A coordinated research programme should be developed to
further investigate the full range of educational impacts of fieldwork
in science including case studies in formal/ informal contexts,
day/residential venues, local/remote sites and rural/urban communities.
Recommendation 6
Leading educational bodies, learned societies and high-profile
supporters of outdoor education should use their combined influence
to support positive attitudes towards fieldwork in science
amongst their contacts and audiences (including headteachers,
governors and parents). These institutions and individuals should
focus particularly on areas such as raising the profile of fieldwork
in whole school policies and development plans, a reduction in
health and safety bureaucracy and the development of in-service
professional development programmes.
Marianne Cutler
ASE Director of Curriculum Innovation and Chair of ASE's OSWG
Association for Science Education Outdoor Science Working Group
10 May 2011
63
Outdoor Science Working Group (2011). Outdoor Science. A co-ordinated
approach to high-quality teaching and learning in fieldwork for
science education. Association for Science Education/Nuffield
Foundation. Field Studies Council Occasional Publication 144. Back
64
Outdoor Science Working Group (2007). Initial Teacher Education
and the Outdoor Classroom: Standards for the Future. Field
Studies Council and Association for Science Education. Field Studies
Council Occasional Publication 122. Back
65
ASE survey of teachers on practical work and field work, 388 responses
including smaller numbers of responses on specific fieldwork
questions (April 2011) Back
66
Lock, R. (2010). Biology fieldwork in schools and colleges in
the UK: an analysis of empirical research from 1963-2009. Journal
for Biological Education 2: 58-34 Back
67
Outdoor Science Working Group (2011). Outdoor Science. A co-ordinated
approach to high-quality teaching and learning in fieldwork for
science education. Association for Science Education/Nuffield
Foundation. Field Studies Council Occasional Publication 144.
Outdoor Science Working Group (2007).
Initial Teacher Education and the Outdoor Classroom: Standards
for the Future. Field Studies Council and Association for
Science Education. Field Studies Council Occasional Publication
122. Back
68
Common Sense; Common Safety (2010) http://www.number10.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/402906_CommonSense_acc.pdf
Back
69
Tilling, S. (2004). Fieldwork in UK secondary schools: influences
and provision. Journal of Biological Education 38 (2):
54-58. Back
70
Skills for Jobs: Today and Tomorrow (2010) http://www.ukces.org.uk/upload/pdf/NSSA_Volume%201_FINAL_BOOKMARKED_110310.pdf Back
71
Most Wanted Postgraduate Skills Needs in the Environment Sector
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/funding/available/postgrad/skillsreview/summary.pdf
Back
72
Dierking, L. et al. (2003) Policy statement of the "informal
science education" ad hoc committee House of Commons Education
and Skills Committee (2005) Education outside the classroom
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2006) Learning
outside the classroom manifesto House of Commons Children,
Schools and Families Committee (2010) Transforming education
outside the classroom Ofsted (2010) Science Survey Visits.
Generic grade descriptors and supplementary subject-specific guidance
for inspectors on making judgements during visits to schools Back
| 
