|
 |
NSC Home Page > EUAS Contents > 16 Educational research
APPENDICES
16 Educational research
The Education Section of this report points to the very heavy reliance of science teachers upon textbooks as a their main source of information. In addition, it questions the value of many traditional non-textbook methods of delivering material and support to schools. This is based upon research by Keele University and the Council for Science and Technology which is described in more detail later in this Appendix.
School Science Textbook Perceptions Survey
As part of the current project, it was therefore considered appropriate to carry out a short survey of school science text books in an attempt to gauge the coverage of the quarrying industry. This was conducted by the NSC in January 2004, of the main texts then in print. The nature of that investigation cannot claim to be statistically robust (the population is far too small and time was too limited). Neither was it feasible to search the whole of each text (many books extend to 200 pages or more). Instead, after initially scoping various science texts, it was observed that virtually all references to quarrying were to be found in chemistry texts, or sections of texts and in particular those parts dealing with lime or limestone. So this provided the main focus for the search, which was restricted to GCSE/AS/A level material. The NC requires teachers at KS 2-4 science, to take into account environmental effects of science and technology and to do this in a balanced form (at KS4 recognising that different groups have different views).Sixteen textbooks were examined. The results are summarised in the main Industry Section of this report (see Perceptions), and comments on specific texts are given below.
KEY
P = publisher
A = author
T = titleP - Nelson Thornes
A - Laurie Ryan
T - Chemistry for you - National Curriculum Edition : GCSE
pp 127-131 references to Peak District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks,
References to blasting and huge quarries.
"Many people are against quarrying working, against which has to be balanced arguments about uses, jobs and amenities, 'what are your views?' "P - Nelson Thornes
A - Graham Hill and John Holman
T - Chemistry in context 5th edition
p220 quarrying limestone near Kirkby Stephen, Cumbria, UK; photography of very dusty operation with operational lime kilns. No evident environmental references.P - Pearson - Longman
A - Erik Lewis and Martyn Barry
T - Chemistry
Various passing references to lime and limestone; chemical and physical properties. No references or pictures re environment or quarries.P - Longman
A - Jim Clark
T - GCSE Chemistry
p161-3 sets out pros and cons of quarrying.P - Longman
A - Iain Brand and Richard Gunn
T - Chemistry 11-14
No obvious references.P - Cambridge U.P./OCR
A - Brian Ratcliffe
T - Chemistry Advanced Science (AS)
Many references to limestone. Close up of kilns (probably near Buxton?)
No specific references to environmental issues.
P - Cambridge U.P.
A - John Mills and Peter Evans
T - Core Chemistry (11-14)
pp86-7 limestone - picture of quarry in Yorkshire Dales (Horton?) and a kiln (in USA?). No specific references to environmental issues.P - Oxford U.P.
A - Paddy Gannon
T - Framework science (KS3)
Reference made to limestone/uses; environmental issues not mentionedP - Oxford U.P.
A - George Bethell and David Coppack
T - Chemistry First (13-14)
Various references to limestone (also p37 reference to bauxite mining and environmental issues).P - Oxford U P
A - Rose-Marie Gallagher and Paul Ingram
T - Chemistry for Higher Tier
pp216-7 to quarry or not - detailed debate
Limestone and its uses.P - Oxford U P
A - Rose-Marie Gallagher and Paul Ingram
T - Complete Chemistry
Brief coverage.P - Oxford U P ?
A - Pat O'Brien
T - Target Science - Chemistry Foundation Tier - Modular Science (AQA)
Brief mention.P - Hodder/Murray (Hodder and Stoughton/John Murray)
A - B Earl and L D R Wilford
T - GCSE Chemistry (Second Edition)
p76 'control of Swindon (sic) lime plant'. Reference to 'large quantities of lime being produced by a company called Tilcon' (both in picture captions).P - Hodder/Murray
A - Graham Hill
T - Chemistry Counts (third edition)
p162 "limestone quarrying or countryside. 'How do we balance the benefits it brings with the problems it causes?' "
P - Hodder
A - L D R Wilford and B Earle (ed. K Foulds)
T - GCSE double award chemistry (1996; reprinted 2002)
p46-8 'limestone is an essential mineral. It has been estimated that if quarrying continues at its present, rate a quarter of all the Peak District will be removed within the lifetime of somebody who is a child today'.*P - Hodder
A - Terry Mansfield, Rafael Faraday and Ian Brandon
T - AQA GCSE Chemistry
p63 'limestone landscapes are considered by many people to provide the most spectacular landscape in England. But bearing in mind limestone is such a useful material there are difficult environmental decisions that need to be made when quarrying for limestone.'*N.B.: Comment from NSC (a body charged by the Government with monitoring the reserves and sales of limestone in this area) - this is a grossly misleading, exaggeratingly inaccurate statement.
Summaries of related educational research by Keele University
This work was conducted by staff now associated with the Earth Science Education Unit at Keele University (see entry in Appendix 19). It should be emphasised that the research now described focussed upon Earth science and that the spectrum offered by the aggregates industry is different and in many respects far broader than Earth science. However it is considered to be a very useful indicator.
1) Science Teachers
In 1998 science teachers providing Earth science were surveyed by Keele University to gain a better understanding of their perceptions, and sources of knowledge and to address standards of teaching (162 responses were received from secondary school science teachers).Principle findings:
Over 60% of teachers had received no formal Earth science teaching (i.e. including instruction in school).
Main specialisms of teachers responding (at KS3): chemistry 33%, biology 32%, physics 31%, Geology 2%.
Main specialisms of teachers responding (at KS4): chemistry 59%, biology 18% physics 18%, geology 0%, others 5%.
Well over half, considered Earth science moderately enjoyable to teach, their knowledge was moderate, as was their view of its importance to overall science curriculum; the interest of pupils was moderate to high.
Of critical importance was their response to practical work - moderate to low and even more significantly to fieldwork - over 80% did no fieldwork at all and less than 5% did a day or half a day a year.
Sources of information used to support teaching:
Science text books KS3 - c37%
Other general science text books - c43%
Earth science texts - c5-25%
Popular TV programmes - c30%
Assistance from geography teachers c28%
Assistance from science teacher colleagues 68%
Inset and various (inc. govt/professional/OU/industry) materials under 10%(Source: C.King 2001 Earth Science Teaching in England and Wales : Progress and challenge. Teaching Earth Science V.26 N.2 pp59-67)
The findings generally echo the Council for Science and Technology (2000) survey of 576 science teachers indicating that 90% used textbooks 'often' and nearly 40% used colleagues 'often'. The frequency of use of materials published by industry, learned/professional, societies, government agencies, museums and educational associations was again very low, averaging around 4%.
In summary, whereas very few science teachers have specific grounding in Earth science, they were generally comfortable in many respects with the current situation in particular relying heavily upon standard texts and colleagues and very little indeed upon practical work especially fieldwork or customised materials. The survey did not however cover web-based materials, nor did it examine the reasons whether or not customised materials were being used to a significant degree.
2) Examinations and Syllabuses Survey
A second survey (also by King in 1998 and reported in the same article) investigated the robustness of Earth science content in GCSE (double award) science syllabuses and examinations. The National Curriculum Science NC(S) in 1998 contained 22 Earth science related statements. An evaluation team assessed the degree to which the statements had been comprehensively covered by the eleven syllabuses. Six of the syllabuses did not properly cover 10-12 of the 22 statements. In most of the remainder, 5-7 were not properly covered. Furthermore, all syllabuses contained errors or over-simplifications: in two cases, 6 and in another, 3 instances were identified.In terms of examinations (10 in all based on summer 1996), Earth science questions accounted for 1.9-8.7% with an average of 5.4%. Seven were free of errors whereas the others contained 17%, 18% and 60% errors respectively. The latter is of particular concern as teachers frequently turn to examination questions not just for a steer as to further questions, but as general guidance for teaching. The extent to which questions relied upon recall was also measured. The average for Earth science was 43% (range 18-73%), compared with the 20% maximum recommended by QCA.
[NB - National Curriculum 2000 produced a new generation of GCSE double Award science syllabuses - not yet surveyed, but during preparation, some examination agencies did seek advice from ESEU on Earth science content.]
3) Teacher Misconceptions Survey
In summary, a survey of 76 teachers taking part in an ESEU plate tectonics workshop showed that there was a variable, and generally poor, understanding of basic Earth science concepts by those already actually teaching the Earth science components of the NC(S).4) Text Book Survey
In 2001, a survey of 51 textbooks used by schools for NC(S) 2000 in England was surveyed by an ESEU team (Chris King, Alistair Fleming, Peter Kennett and David Thompson). A detailed report analysing the findings (101pp) was produced by ESEU in 2002. This revealed an average of one error per page of Earth science coverage; some were notably higher. Furthermore the overall coverage of Earth science topics within NC(S) 2000 was deemed to be inadequate in more than half the survey sample.