sugar-coated physics - bonhoeffercollege...

1

Sugar-Coated Physics

Kate Bradshaw

September 2004

Submitted as partial fulfilment of the requirements for an MSc in

Science Communication at Imperial College of Science,

Technology and Medicine

SUGAR-COATED PHYSICS KATE BRADSHAW

2

Contents

CHAPTER 1 – APPROACHING A-LEVEL PHYSICS 4

1.1 Why A-level Physics? 4

1.2 Curriculum 2000 5

1.3 Why SHAP? 6

1.4 Methods 7

1.5 Limitations 10

CHAPTER 2 – WHY SUGAR-COAT PHYSICS? 14

2.1 Is sugar-coating necessary? 14

2.2 The power of statistics 15

2.3 Why get A-level numbers up? 18

2.4 Vested interests 20

2.5 What does A-level physics need to be? 21

CHAPTER 3 – CONTEXT FIRST 23

3.1 Shaping SHAP 23

3.2 Real- life relevance 25

3.3 Active learning 26

3.4 Adjusting to AS after GCSE 28

3.5 Spiralling at speed 30

3.6 Remember the physics 32

3.7 Something for everyone 33


3

CHAPTER 4 – SWEETNESS AND LIGHT: THE FEMALE PERSPECTIVE 37

4.1 Girls and physics 37

4.2 Sweetness… 38

4.3 …and light 41

4.4 In search of role models 43

CHAPTER 5 – ATTRACTING A NEW TYPE OF STUDENT 46

5.1 Infectious enthusiasm 46

5.2 A new type of student 52

5.3 New skills, new assessment 54

5.4 Repackaging 55

CHAPTER 6 – A-LEVEL PHYSICS RE-BRANDED 56

6.1 What is physics? 56

6.2 Destroying the elite? 57

6.3 Realism 58

6.4 Tomlinson and the future of A-level physics 62

BIBLIOGRAPHY 64

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 76

APPENDICES I


4

CHAPTER 1 – APPROACHING A-LEVEL PHYSICS

1.1 Why A-level Physics?

Apparently A-levels are getting easier1. We are told this every year2, but it still confuses

me3. For me, A-levels were the hardest academic task I’ve ever had to do. The transition

from GCSE to A-level felt like a massive jump. With a funny yet inept physics teacher,

I had to rely on the dry, difficult textbooks to get through the course. Despite, or maybe

because, of this hard work, I pursued Physics on to degree level and have never

regretted it. But now, a decade on from when I began my A-levels, I wanted to see how

the subject had changed. How did pupils of today find the experience? How was it now

taught? Was it really easier? Apparently numbers are dropping4,5, and apparently more

female physicists are needed6,7. I wanted to investigate these claims and strip away the

hype to find the real story of A-level physics in the 21st century.

1 John Clare, Education Editor, “A-levels have become easier, schools minister admits”, The Telegraph, 18 August 2004, at http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/18/nexam18.xml 2 Every year someone complains about the state of education, in particular A-levels. This stance can even trace back to 1900 BC: Joanne Lawson, “Sowing the seeds of discontent”, EducationGuardian.co.uk , 19 August 2004, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/alevels2004/story/0,14505,1285768,00.html 3 Others challenge this claim too: Anthony Hilton, “Essays from past prove standards have never been higher”, Evening Standard , 19 August 2004, pp. 16-17. 4 Nicholas Pyke and Linda Blackburne, “A-level with 2,000 desserters”, Times Education Supplement, 10 January 1997, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=News+% 26+opinion&id=56625&Type=0 5 Lucy Ward, “Media studies up, sciences down”, The Guardian, 19 August 2004, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/alevels2004/story/0,14505,1285925,00.html 6 PhysicsWeb, “Physics needs women”, PhysicsWeb, March 2002, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/15/3/1 7 Institute of Physics, “Press Release: The number of girls taking AS and A level physics continues to fall”, Institute of Physics, 14 August 2003, at http://physics.iop.org/IOP/Press/PR6103.html


5

1.2 Curriculum 2000

A-levels had changed somewhat in the last few years8. Education reviews in the late

1990s had prompted the government to change the A-level education scheme. In

September 2000, the scheme known as National Provisional Legacy changed to

Curriculum 20009. Before this change, there had been AS (Advanced Supplementary)

courses, which contained half the content of an A-level and were assessed at A-level

standard. Though their aim had been to broaden the 16-19 curriculum, they had not

been a great success10. The Curriculum 2000 scheme11,12 split A- levels in two: AS (now

standing for Advanced Subsidiary) and A2. The AS courses, examined at the end of

Year 12 (lower sixth), would reasonably reflect what the students had learnt in one year,

thereby demoting an AS to “a qualification intermediate between A-level and GCSE”13.

It was hoped that this new format would ease the transition between GCSE and A-level,

the transition that I had struggled with when younger. Curriculum 2000 recommends

that students take four AS subjects, and then continue three of them to A2, in a

continued aim to broaden the 16-19 curriculum.

Under the Curriculum 2000 scheme, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

(QCA)14 regulate the content and assessment of each subject. For physics A-level, QCA

8 My thanks go to Steve Jones of CfBT (Centre for British Teachers http://www.cfbt.com) for his invaluable crash course in science education. 9 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Changes in A-level Physics: some background”, Institute of Physics, at http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0031-9120/36/4/601#abs_toc_12 10 Ibid. 11 Teachernet, “Curriculum 2000 and support for Curriculum Managers”, Teachernet, website accessed 14 August 2004, date written not given, at http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/supplyteachers/detail.cfm?&vid=5&cid=18&sid=119&ssid=5010701&opt=0 12 Curriculum 2000, “Curriculum 2000: Implementation Progress Report”, Curriculum 2000 , July 2000, at http://lsc.wwt.co.uk/documents/othercouncilpublications/other_pdf/curr2k.pdf 13 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Changes in A-level Physics: some background”. 14 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), “Physics”, at http://www.qca.org.uk/ages14-19/subjects/physics.html


6

define a 60% “core” of content that must be included. Exam boards then work within

these restrictions to create syllabuses. In England there are three exam boards: OCR15,

AQA16 and Edexcel17, in Wales there is WJEC18 and in Northern Ireland there is

CCEA19. The Welsh and Northern Irish exam boards each offer one physics A-level

syllabus, but the English exam boards each offer two syllabuses. Things were beginning

to get complex.

1.3 Why SHAP?

I decided to focus on the English exam boards and looked at the six syllabuses in more

detail. It was then that two in particular stood out. One was from OCR, set up by the

Institute of Physics20 and entitled “Advancing Physics”21. The other was from Edexcel

and set up by the University of York Science Education Group 22, entitled “Salters

Horners Advanced Physics (SHAP)”23. Both of these courses were attempting to

modernise physics by introducing innovative methods and concepts. But of the two of

them, the SHAP course looked the most intriguing. It seemed to turn everything on its

head. Pupils were first introduced to a practical application or context, such as bungy

jumping, and then told about the underlying physics concepts. Topics ranged from sport

15 Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations (OCR), “AS/A Level GCE and Subject Family: Sciences”, at

http://www.ocr.org.uk/OCR/WebSite/docroot/qualifications/qualificationFinder.do?qualificationTypeOID=1954&subjectFamilyOID=1998&x=54&y=44 16 Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), “Physics A”, at http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gceasa/phyA.html and “Physics B” at http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gceasa/phyB.html 17 Edexcel, “Physics”, at http://www.edexcel.org.uk/qualifications/QualificationSubject.aspx?id=48952 18 Welsh Joint Education Committee (WJEC), “General Certificate of Education – Physics”, at http://www.wjec.co.uk/physics.html 19 Council for the Curriculum Examinations and Assessment (CCEA), at http://www.ccea.org.uk/ 20 Institute of Physics (IOP), at http://www.iop.org/ 21 For more information on this course visit http://advancingphysics.iop.org/products/index.html 22 University of York Science Education Group (UYSEG), at http://www.uyseg.org/home_menu.htm 23 Salters Horners Advanced Physics (SHAP), at http://www.york.ac.uk/org/seg/salters/physics/ and at http://www.horners.org.uk/pages/Education/shap.html


7

to archaeology, medicine to music24. But the topic that stood out to me the most was

“Good Enough to Eat”25. Here was a whole topic on food, in particular sweets –

stretching bootlaces to test elasticity, testing hardness using mints, refracting light

through sugar solutions, examining viscosity with honey and syrup – it looked fantastic.

The textbooks were colourful and easy to read, and the contexts were grounded in

reality so seemed relevant. But the more I found out about the course, the more

questions I had. It sounded great in theory, but what was it like in practise? How were

the students responding to it? Was this re-packaging interesting, different and exciting,

or muddling, misleading and unnecessary? Why was the physics being “sugar-coated”?

What had caused such a course to emerge? What effects was it having on the pupils, the

teachers, the numbers and the grades? I felt the best way to get answers was to visit

schools and interview teachers and pupils directly.

1.4 Methods

In addition to interviewing teachers and pupils, I wanted to interview the course director

and co-creator: Elizabeth Swinbank. I wanted to get her thoughts on the course and

compare them to those within schools, to examine how the course was filtering down

through the academics and educators to the students themselves.

I was conscious of the argument that teaching has a greater effect on the students’

experiences than a syllabus26, and felt that this factor may cloud my research into the

24 For a summary of SHAP’s content, see Appendix 7. 25 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Good enough to eat”, Physics Education , January 2004, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 52-57. 26 My thanks to Nick Fay for helpful discussions concerning teaching, and see also: Pauline Mills, “Never mind content, look at how physics is taught”, Times Education Supplement, 20 June 1997, at


8

SHAP course itself. I felt it was therefore important to choose two schools that were

using SHAP, to compare results. I also wanted to contrast a mixed school with a single-

sex school, to explore the notion that girls have more confidence and perform better in

science when in a single-sex environment 27,28,29. I chose two schools, both

comprehensives in similar middle class areas: an all-girls school and a mixed “specialist

science” school30. Both were under pressure to get high grades in science. The all-girls

school consistently scored above the national average in A-level league tables, and the

mixed school, though lower in the tables, now needed to improve its science results to

retain its specialist science status.

I informed the schools that my study would be anonymous and that I wished to

interview both teachers and pupils. I chose to conduct one-to-one, semi-structured,

recorded interviews. I wanted these qualitative interviews to be away from teachers and

pupils, so that even though they were being recorded, interviewees could still feel

relaxed enough to be as honest as possible.

Concerning pupils, I decided to restrict my study to interviewing Year 12s. They would

be coming to the end of their AS course. They would have clearer memories of their

GCSE Science and be able to draw better comparisons than the Year 13s. I planned to

http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=Friday&id=55830&Type=0 27 Eileen Gillibrand, Peter Robinson, Richard Brawn and Albert Osborn, “Girls’ participation in physics in single sex classes in mixed schools in relation to confidence and achievement”, International Journal of Science Education, 1999, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 349-362. 28 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, The Missing Half: Girls and Science Education, Alison Kelly (ed.), (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1981), p. 101. 29 Alison Kelly, “Why girls don’t do science”, Science for Girls? , Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1987), p. 15. 30 For more information on specialist science schools see: Department of Education and Skills, “The Standards Site: Specialist Schools” at http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/specialistschools/


9

interview them in July, after their AS exams, so that although they didn’t yet know their

results, they could still look back over the year and contemplate continuing physics to

A2 or dropping it. Without two years to fully consolidate their learning, I felt that I

would get a broader range of responses.

Ten years ago, I had been one of five studying A-level physics at an all-girls school. So

when the all-girls school I planned to visit told me 24 girls were studying AS physics, I

was shocked. For the first time in the school’s history, they had two sets for A-level

physics. The mixed school had one set of 13 pupils. Due to large numbers and time

constraints, I was not able to interview every pupil. Instead I interviewed as many as

possible 31 and prepared a questionnaire for every pupil, including those interviewed, to

complete32. Concerning teachers, I interviewed two per school33. At the all-girls school,

several pupils were absent, so only 17 were available to complete questionnaires. The

breakdown of interviews and questionnaire responses are shown in the table below. For

anonymity, the interviewees were coded with numbers at the all-girls school and letters

at the mixed school.

Table 1.1 Breakdown of interviews and questionnaires, including codes and gender

All-girls set 1 All-girls set 2 Mixed Total Teachers interviewed

T1 (male) T2 (female) TA, TB (males) 4 (1 female, 3 males)

Pupils interviewed

P1, P2, P3 (females)

P4, P5, P6, P7, P8 (females)

PA, PC (females), PB, PD (males)

12 (10 females, 2 males)

Pupil questionnaires completed

8 females 9 females 13 (3 females, 10 males)

30 (20 females, 10 males)

31 For a list of the questions I structured pupil interviews around, please see Appendix 2. 32 To view this questionnaire, please see Appendix 1. 33 For a list of the questions that structured the teacher interviews, please see Appendix 3.


10

With more responses from females than males it seemed unavoidable to discuss gender

issues to some degree. I shall address these issues in Chapter 4.

At each school I chose to interview an experienced teacher who had helped choose the

course, and a more junior teacher who had inherited the course, in the hope of getting a

range of responses. The varying levels of experience and exposure to the SHAP course

are shown in the following table:

Table 1.2 Breakdown of interviewed teachers’ experience

Teacher Years teaching

Years at school

Experience of Salters Horners Advanced Physics

T1 8 2/3 New to SHAP. Joined the school in January 2004 so only 2 terms experience of the course.

T2 20 9 Current Head of Science. Nominated the school to be a pilot school for the SHAP course in 1998.

TA 38 12 Former Deputy Head, retired but back temporarily due to staffing difficulties. As previous Head of Science his views had been sought when the school chose SHAP.

TB 10 3 Inherited SHAP course, which had been running for a year before he joined the school.

In addition to the two schools, I prepared a list of questions for Elizabeth Swinbank 34,

the SHAP course director, who kindly found time to answer these via email.

1.5 Limitations

By choosing to conduct qualitative, semi-structured interviews, I naturally encountered

the limitations associated with this method. Qualitative analysis does not allow for

extrapolation, the quotes themselves will not allow me to draw generalised conclusions.

34 See Appendix 4 for the list of questions.


11

Thus my analysis will also draw on quantitative statistics and explore other research and

articles to address the wider context of A-levels and get beyond the purely anecdotal.

But despite its limitations, the qualitative approach can be beneficial. It gives greater

depth, providing a range rather than a frequency of responses. It explores what people

think as well as why they think it35. By having only a loose structure to my interviews, I

was able to expand on aspects and explore avenues in the conversation. In fact these

deviations were often much more revealing, when the pupils and teachers relaxed and

chatted freely rather than feeling restrained by a rigid question-answer format. By

creating as relaxed an atmosphere as possible, I was able to get what appeared to be

honest responses.

In fact honesty is another factor to consider. The one-to-one interview is quite an

artificial environment. Nervousness and eagerness to please36 may conflict with what

the pupils really think 37. Thankfully the maturity of the Year 12 pupils worked in my

favour. The majority were confident and headstrong, and happy to have the chance to

express their thoughts about the course, away from the ears of teachers and fellow

pupils.

35 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, School Science Review, September 2000, Vol. 82, No. 298, p. 24. 36 Nick Russell, “Unit 8: The basis of public knowledge. Children learning and children learning science”, MSc Science Communication, Core Module 2: Spreading the word. The history of communication in science and society, (London: Imperial College, unpublished, 2003), p. 17. 37 This can be inferred from the SHAP assessment carried out by the University of York, in which students were unwilling to select a least interesting context. While they may not have had a least interesting choice, the fact that it was a UYSEG course being assessed by UYSEG researchers may have influenced responses. For the study itself see: Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Students’ ideas about interesting contexts in SHAP books I and II – An Interim Research Report”, Department of Education Studies, University of York, December 1999. Available from Bob Campbell, [email protected]


12

Another issue is that the pupils “haven’t experienced the other version … you can’t do a

control on one child”38. I won’t be able compare and contrast SHAP with other current

syllabuses, but I will be able to explore the nature of SHAP in depth. What I can

compare are pupil responses to SHAP AS after studying the more traditional GCSE

layout. The pupils are “uniquely qualified” 39 to comment on the transition between the

two levels. I can also, to some extent, compare my perceptions of this new course, in

light of the interviews, with my memories of the traditional A-level course that I

studied, thereby touching on how A-level physics has changed over time.

Concerning my methods, as well as the interviews, there were questionnaires.

Unfortunately questionnaire responses generally “mask many underlying reasons”40.

Students are often “much more willing to discuss their reactions than put them on

paper”41. It did transpire that the data obtained from the questionnaires was nowhere

near as revealing as the interview transcripts.

Another problem was that once the questionnaires had been collected and the interviews

transcribed, I was left with a wealth of data. In order to write anything meaningful, I

have had to focus on what I felt were the most revealing issues. This has meant that not

everything is mentioned42. For example there is no room to discuss pupil and teacher

responses to the textbook, and the variety of AS subjects that pupils are combining with

38 Quote from teacher T2. 39 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”, Post-14 Research Group, School of Education, University of Leeds, 1997, at http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002217.htm 40 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, Public Understanding of Science , 1996, Vol. 5, p. 328. 41 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Betty Dlamini, “Contextualizing science teaching in Swaziland: some student reactions”, International Journal of Science Education, 1996, Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 313. 42 If you wish to find out more about the omitted research data, please contact me by either emailing [email protected] or phoning 07957 185 360.


13

physics. There is also no room to explore the influential factors that helped students

choose AS physics. Though, as others have found, the most popular reasons were

interest and career prospects43,44. Stripping away the data was unfortunately inevitable.

The issues that I will focus on will be the responses to the context- led approach, gender

themes and the underlying reasons behind the rise in numbers and grades that both

schools are so proud of. By focussing on these themes, I hope to explore the nature of

this course and its place in the wider context of A-level physics.

43 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 325. 44 J. Solbes and A. Vilches, “STS Interactions in the Teaching of Physics and Chemistry”, Science Education, July 1997, Vol. 81, No. 4, pp. 379-380.


14

CHAPTER 2 – WHY SUGAR-COAT PHYSICS?

2.1 Is sugar-coating necessary?

“When I was growing up … it never occurred to me that science was some kind

of ‘bitter pill’ that needed sugar-coating. No, for me, science – in particular,

physics, since my Dad was a physicist – was already filled with alluring

romance and enticing mystery.”45

Hofstadter was lucky, his father provided an enthusiastic role-model showing the young

boy a wonderful, captivating view of physics. However, enthusiastic role-models are

declining. The media currently portrays physics education in a state of crisis, where a

vicious circle46 has emerged of “reluctant students and inexpert tutors”47. Fewer physics

graduates are choosing to become teachers48,49,50 and physics is increasingly being

taught by non-specialists51,52. Teacher vacancies remain high and students choosing A-

45 Douglas R. Hofstadter, “Popular Culture and the Threat to Rational Inquiry”, Science, 24 July 1998, Vol. 281, No. 5376, pp. 512-513, available at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/281/5376/512 46 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, The Missing Half: Girls and Science Education , Alison Kelly (ed.), (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1981), p. 286. 47 Tim Radford, “Royal Society warns on science education”, The Guardian, 18 Dec 2003, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1109360,00.html 48 PhysicsWeb, “The classroom needs you”, PhysicsWeb, October 1999, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/12/10/1 49 PhysicsWeb, “How good is physics in the UK?”, PhysicsWeb, June 2000, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/13/6/1/1 50 BBC.co.uk, “Science lessons ‘tedious and dull’”, BBC.co.uk , 11 July 2002, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2120424.stm. This article claims there is a problem recruiting teachers, but a reader’s email then disputes this. 51 Julia King, “Young physicists being turned off”, The Guardian, 18 December 2003, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1109171,00.html 52 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics , or reject it”, Physics Education , 1994, Vol. 29, p. 369.


15

level physics are declining 53. The cries emerging appear to say that if physics didn’t

need sweetening before, it does now.

2.2 The power of statistics

I wanted to see whether A-level physics really was in a state of crisis, by examining the

actual statistics and seeing how the numbers had changed over the years. The graph

below shows the total number and gender breakdown of candidates that have taken A-

level physics over the last 20 years54.

Graph 2.1 Total number and gender breakdown of A-level physics examination entries (1985-2004)

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f ca

nd

idat

es

FemaleMale

Total

The first striking thing about this graph is that the total and the male lines fluctuate

almost identically. Though female numbers have declined to some degree, they remain a

53 Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society Education Committee”, Royal Society, 17 December 2003, at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/releasedetails.cfm?file=495.txt 54 For the tabulated figures and source information, see Appendix 5.


16

constant proportion of the total candidates, as the following graph of percentages

shows55:

Graph 2.2 Percentages of male and female students taking A-level physics examinations (1985-2004)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Yea

r

Percentage of total A-level physics candidates

% Female

% Male

Fluctuating between 21% and 24% over 20 years, the percentage of females taking

physics has remained almost static. This indicates that schemes to encourage girls into

the field have proved ineffective and require rethinking56.

Examining graphs 2.1 and 2.2 raise a number of issues. Yes numbers have fallen, but as

graph 2.1 shows, from the mid-90s onwards the fall began to slow, and in 2002 numbers

even went up57. A straightforward explanation for the decline in numbers throughout the

1990s, is likely to be a combination of AS levels being introduced, thereby broadening

the choices open the students58, and the introduction of courses such as business studies

55 For the tabulated figures and source information, see Appendix 5. 56 A point noted in Institute of Physics, “8.7 Physics Statistics 1: GCSE and A-level”, Institute of Physics, Oct 1999, at http://policy.iop.org/Policy/8.7.doc 57 Institute of Physics, “Institute of Physics response to A Level results”, Institute of Physics, August 2003, at http://www.iop.org/news/605 58 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 322.


17

and psychology at this level, creating new and appealing routes for analytical minds59.

Now, with increased choice, only the more able students are picking the subject, as this

enlightening quote shows:

“Despite the diminishing number of physics entries, the total getting grades A-C

has remained surprisingly constant at around 20,000 … the number of lower

grades has dropped.”60

Indeed with falling numbers and a constant amount getting A-C, the percentages end up

increasing by default (the joy of statistics!), as illustrated by the following graph61:

Graph 2.3 Percentages achieving each grade in A-level physics (1992-2001)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

A B C D E N U

Grade

Per

cen

tag

e ac

hie

vin

g e

ach

gra

de

1992

19931994

1995

19961997

19981999

20002001

This suggests that physics exams aren’t getting easier or being dumbed down, the

weaker students are simply seeking alternative subjects. With increased choice and an

education system obsessed with assessment, perhaps weaker pupils are being

discouraged from a notoriously difficult subject like physics, for the sake of the league

tables. They themselves know that they need good grades if they want to go to 59 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 60 Nicholas Pyke and Linda Blackburne, “A-level with 2,000 desserters”. 61 For the tabulated figures and source information, see Appendix 6.


18

university, so why not choose subjects they know they’ll do well in? 62,63 In my thirty

questionnaire responses, when asked if they planned to continue to A2, four said no and

nine said they didn’t know. Every reason without exception was due to the grade they

thought they would get.

Numbers aside, grades percentages could also be increasing as educational research

feeds back into schools, and teaching and assessment methods improve. In any case the

“crisis in science education”64 appears to contain an element of hype:

“How many physicists do we need? … [In] the UK … the number of new

physics graduates every year has remained fairly constant at around 2,500 for

more than a decade. This is a perfectly satisfactory state of affairs, even if the

number of students going to university has more than doubled in this period.”65

2.3 Why get A-level numbers up?

So what is at the core of this hype? Why should more students study physics? Three

main arguments continuously emerge:

“One response is that science and technology are becoming ever more important

in the world, which means that it is essential for all citizens to be able to make

informed decisions. The hard-headed business answer is that modern economics

will only be successful if they have workforces with strong science and

62 Vivienne Parry, “Don’t mention the S-word”, The Guardian, 2 September 2004, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,,1294932,00.html 63 Kate Hilpern, “Life, the universe and everything”, The Independent, Physicist, a special supplement produced in association with Institute of Physics, 9 October 2003, p. 3. 64 Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society Education Committee”. 65 PhysicsWeb, “The classroom needs you”.


19

technology skills. The physics community, in turn, will argue that we teach

physics to train the next generation of physicists.”66

The first argument states that if we are enlightened citizens, we’ll be more likely to

engage with scientific issues67. As a result we’ll understand and trust scientists, and the

scientific community can avoid scandals such as MMR/Autism links and GM food

backlashes. The second argument is that to thrive in a modern global economy, the UK

needs to be outstanding in science and technology68 and remain at the cutting edge 69.

The third argument is to train the next generation of physicists. Though it is also

acknowledged how much the UK benefits from overseas scientists “bringing their skills

and knowledge to the UK”70.

“GCSE is about science for all, a threshold of scientific literacy; A-levels … are

a high- level selection device which has enabled us to identify students who

could be educated to degree standards.”71

In my opinion, there are flaws to all three of these arguments. However, I will reserve

my main criticisms until chapter 6, as these arguments helped to highlight the need for

revamping A-levels and therefore, to some extent, paved the way to the SHAP course.

66 Peter Rodgers, “New dimensions in education”, Physicsweb, January 2004, at http://www.physicsweb.org/article/world/17/1/1 67 Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society Education Committee”, Royal Society, 17 December 2003, at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/releasedetails.cfm?file=495.txt 68 Tim Radford, “Royal Society warns on science education”, The Guardian, 18 Dec 2003, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1109360,00.html 69 Royal Society, “Media Release: Government must reverse “disturbing” A-level science trends”, Royal Society, 17 May 2004, at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/releasedetails.cfm?file=533.txt 70 Ibid. 71 TES editorial, “Science time bomb ticks on”, Times Education Supplement, 3 January 1997, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=News+%26+opinion&id=40316&Type=0


20

2.4 Vested interests

Despite reserving criticisms, I will highlight one aspect. The arguing parties all seem to

have vested interests. It can be argued that they create hype to help publicise their own

issues. Woven into these articles and press releases, supposedly about A-level

education, are tangential elements of self-promotion72,73 and funding74,75.

It transpires that school education is a political minefield, with many stakeholders:

“students, teachers, parents, school trustees, the scientific community, industry …

[government], and many other groups and institutions”76. Each group has its own

values, and some groups have greater power and influence. In fact, it was the influence

of positivists that resulted in a scientific curriculum far removed from reality77. To the

positivists, science was neutral, pure and uncontroversial, with either right or wrong

answers – it was decontextualised. This approach brought school science in line with

academic, university science. This suited the scientific community, who had “worked

hard to promote an image of science that maximizes resources while minimising

accountability”78. However, keeping the scientists happy had a detrimental effect on

pupils’ enjoyment 79,80,81. So by the late 1990s, it seemed time for the power to shift.

72 Royal Society, “Media Release: Government must reverse “disturbing” A-level science trends”. 73 Julia King [chief executive of the Institute of Physics], “Young physicists being turned off”. 74 Warnings coincide with funding announcement: Tim Radford, “Royal Society warns on science education”. 75 Speech sponsored by “Save British Science” attacks government funding: TES editorial, “Science time bomb ticks on”. 76 P. James Gaskell, “Authentic science and school science”, International Journal of Science Education, 1992, Vol. 14, No. 3, p. 267. Article refers to the situation in Canadian schools, hence the square bracket addition. But the point made is a universal one; there are always a number of stakeholders to consider. 77 Ibid. pp. 268-269. 78 Ibid. 79 Alison Kelly, “Why girls don’t do science”, pp. 12 and 16. 80 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 326. 81 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, pp. 25 and 29.


21

2.5 What does A-level physics need to be?

To avoid further declines in A-level physics, it was felt that physics needed updating to

be more “student focussed”82. Many felt that to capitalise on the breadth of the

Curriculum 2000 scheme, physics needs to appear modern83,84, relevant and

appealing85,86,87,88. It had to avoid becoming the “‘new Latin’, in danger of disappearing

altogether”89. Latin failed to draw on its relevance to language, grammar, botany etc,

and failed to attract both teachers and pupils. In a new competitive climate, up against

more glamorous subject choices such as media studies90 and psychology91, physics

needs to emphasis its relevance and improve its marketing92,93. It needs to capture

imagination and recreate enthusiasm94, perhaps even rebrand itself:

“Science must be rebranded. From now on, physics is to be known as Extreme

Science (strapline: Are you hard enough?).”95

But marketing gimmicks aside, serious thought has gone into improving academic

science. In 1997 and 1998, several meetings were held to review and reconsider the

aims and content of the science curriculum. The outcome of these meetings was a report 82 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Contextualising the Physics Curriculum: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”, p. 6. A paper presented at the BERA Annual Conference, Cardiff, September 2000. Available from Bob Campbell, [email protected] 83 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 29. 84 BBC.co.uk, “Science lessons ‘tedious and dull’”. 85 Peter Rodgers, “New dimensions in education”. 86 Polly Curtis, “Science in schools fails to inspire”, EducationGuardian.co.uk , 11 July 2002, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,753392,00.html 87 Royal Society, “Media Release: Government must reverse “disturbing” A-level science trends”. 88 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 89 Lucy Ward, “Media studies up, sciences down”. 90 Ibid. 91 Psychology had the highest increase in entries in 2004, with 4,984 extra students. Physics dropped 1,885 students, according to: Evening Standard, “A-level Results”, Evening Standard , 19 August 2004, p. 17. 92 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 93 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 322. 94 BBC.co.uk, “Science lessons ‘tedious and dull’”. 95 Vivienne Parry, “Don’t mention the S-word”.


22

entitled “Beyond 2000: Science Education for the future”96. The authors felt that school

science had become removed from contemporary science97. At school, science was

“value-free, objective and detached – a succession of ‘facts’ to be learnt”98 with no

coherence or context. To make the subject more relevant it should incorporate aspects of

technology99,100 such as “how televisions, microwave cookers, radio, digital

communications and other domestic technology ‘work’”101. Science should emphasise

practical work and case studies102, and utilise a wide range of teaching methods103 and

assessment strategies104. It proposed that innovative approaches should be piloted in

schools to test effectiveness105.

This report focussed on pre-16 education, yet it emerged before the introduction of

Curriculum 2000, with its accompanying broader outlook to A-levels. As a result, many

of the aims of the report became relevant at the post-16 stage. In fact, as the Beyond

2000 report was emerging, one pilot A-level course was already incorporating many of

these desired changes: Salters Horners Advanced Physics.

96 Robin Millar and Jonathan Osborne (eds), Beyond 2000: Science education for the future, (London: King’s College, 1998), see also: Robin Millar, Jonathan Osborne and Mick Nott, “Science Education for the future”, School Science Review, December 1998, Vol. 80, No. 291, pp. 19-24. 97 A point also noted in Kathyrn Mayoh and Stephen Knutton, “Using out-of-school experience in science lessons: reality or rhetoric?”, International Journal of Science Education, 1997, Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 849-867 and Fernando Cajas, “Using out-of-school experiences in science lessons: an impossible task”, International Journal of Science Education , 1998, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 623-625. Both papers stress that traditional science teaching draws little on everyday experiences and would benefit more by doing so. 98 Robin Millar and Jonathan Osborne (eds), Beyond 2000: Science education for the future, p. 4. 99 Ibid pp. 18-19. 100 Jan H. Raat and Marc de Vries, “Technology in education: Research and development in the project ‘Physics and Technology’”, International Journal of Science Education, 1987, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 159-168. 101 Robin Millar, Jonathan Osborne and Mick Nott, “Science Education for the future”, p. 23. 102 Robin Millar and Jonathan Osborne (eds), Beyond 2000: Science education for the future, p. 20. 103 Ibid pp. 23-24. 104 Ibid. pp. 25-29. 105 Ibid pp. 30-31.


23

CHAPTER 3 – CONTEXT FIRST

3.1 Shaping SHAP

The context- led Salters Horners Advanced Physics (SHAP) course has Chemistry to

thank for its existence. Some years earlier, the University of York Science Education

Group (UYSEG) established Salters Horners Chemistry, and it was a great success106.

ES: “We … wanted to … counter young people's perceptions that physics is

dull, difficult and doesn’t lead to worthwhile careers. … [Salters

Horners] Chemistry … was evidence that … [a context- led] approach

helped to engage students’ interest, and inspired the development of

some novel and effective activities.”

In traditional physics courses, concepts were taught as discrete units, such as waves,

electricity, forces etc. SHAP’s context- led approach interweaves the concepts,

addressing them as and when they apply to a particular context. For example, a CD

player107 introduces SHAP students to storage and retrieval systems, optical scanning,

binary numbers, wave superposition, refraction, lenses, lasers, spectra, wave-particle

duality and electronic signal detection108. Other contexts may then revisit these physics

concepts by applying them to different scenarios e.g. refraction is also used to test sugar

106 TA emphasised that Chemistry’s success influenced them to change to SHAP. I shall discuss this further in Chapter 5. 107 “Unit 1: Physics at Work, Rest and Play – The Sound of Music: 2 the compact disc player”, Salters Horners Advanced Physics AS Level Student Book , (Oxford: Heinemann Educational Publishers and York: University of York Science Education Group, 2000), pp. 148-169. 108 Advocates of this technology-based approach are Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 30.


24

concentration109, and explain contact lenses110 and underwater vision111. This revisiting

approach reinforces concepts and is known as “spiral learning”112. Because of the spiral

structure, UYSEG decided that all the SHAP units would be compulsory rather than a

core plus options 113.

Elizabeth Swinbank and SHAP co-creator Chris Butlin, researched more contexts than

they needed. They then narrowed them down by assessing whether the contexts were

interesting to both themselves and students. They asked whether there was a “clear

connection with physics at an appropriate level? Is there a strong physics ‘story’”114?

ES: “Overall, we wanted a good variety of contexts e.g. we wanted some to

relate to personal interests (e.g. sport), some ‘unexpected’ (e.g. food),

some ‘cultural’ (e.g. archaeology) some ‘engineering’ (e.g. rail transport)

some ‘frontier physics’ (e.g. particle physics)”

QCA stipulated a 60% ‘core’ of syllabus content. This imposed restrictions on the order

of the material. However UYSEG had “freedom of choice”115 over the remaining 40%,

so restrictions were not too severe. By September 1998 the course was ready to be

piloted and responses from pilot schools were extremely encouraging116,117. Indeed at

the all-girls school, teacher T2 had chosen to pilot the course and had nothing but

109 “Unit 2: Physics for Life – Good Enough to Eat: 4 Sweetness and light”, Salters Horners Advanced Physics AS Level Student Book , pp. 257-259. 110 “Unit 2: Physics for Life – Spare Part Surgery: 3 A sight better”, Salters Horners Advanced Physics AS Level Student Book , p. 300. 111 Ibid. p. 313. 112 I shall address this learning method in more detail later in this chapter. 113 For a summary of the SHAP specification, units and physics covered, see Appendix 7. 114 Quote from Elizabeth Swinbank interview (conducted over email) 115 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Changes in A-level Physics: some background”. 116 Kerry Parker, Elizabeth Swinbank and Bernard Taylor, “Piloting Salters Horners Advancing Physics”, Physics Education, May 2000, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 209-212. 117 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Results from the SHAP pilot: successful and girl-friendly”, Institute of Physics, at http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0031-9120/36/4/601#abs_toc_12


25

enthusiasm for all aspects of SHAP. From September 2000, Edexcel has run the course

officially and each year the numbers of candidates have increased118.

3.2 Real-life relevance

Studies have shown that students find the context- led approach incredibly

engaging119,120. By applying physics to different contexts, they see the everyday

relevance of the subject:

TA: “I think the students find it motivating … it encourages them to look for

Physics in real things.”

PA: “We actually get to understand how Physics is related with real life,

which is the interesting part … now you know what the value of Physics

is in some ways.”

Research indicates that pupils, in particular girls121,122,123, are easily bored124 by abstract,

theoretical science that appears unrelated to their lives125,126. Yet their interest and

enjoyment increases if real- life applications are used127,128,129,130.

118 See chapter 5 graph 5.1 and Appendix 8. 119 Judith M Ramsden, “If it’s enjoyable, is it science?”, School Science Review, June 1992, Vol. 73, No. 265, pp. 65-71. 120 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Betty Dlamini, “Contextualizing science teaching in Swaziland: some student reactions”, pp. 314 and 319. 121 Alison Kelly, “Why girls don’t do science”, pp. 12 and 16. 122 Beverley Bell, “The role of schools in providing a background knowledge of science”, Communicating Science to the Public, (Sussex: Ciba Foundation, 1987), p. 52. 123 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, p. 368. 124 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 326. 125 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, pp. 25 and 29. 126 J. Solbes and A. Vilches, “STS Interactions in the Teaching of Physics and Chemistry”, p. 379. 127 Ibid. p. 384. 128 Barbara Smail, “Encouraging girls to give physics a second chance”, Science for Girls? , Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1987), p. 117. 129 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, p. 111. 130 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Contextualising the Physics Curriculum: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”, p. 1.


26

“Students are most interested in contexts that deal with things they are curious

about, that offer explanations and that deal with contemporary experiences and

modern technology.”131

It therefore seems beneficial to pupils, especially girls132, to be given “background

information about the possible uses and applications of science principles”133. This shift

in relevance is important, as it means school science should now have “relevance to

everyday life, as opposed to relevance to further education, the world of work or ‘being

a scientist’”134.

3.3 Active learning

But contexts alone are not the only motivating factors for students. The SHAP course

contains a wide range of learning activities: group discussions, problem-solving,

computer modelling, creative writing, to name just a few. The sheer variety of leaning

methods also increases pupils’ interest135.

SHAP has put more emphasis onto the practical side of physics, making lessons more

enjoyable 136 and more meaningful137. Abstract theories can sometimes be hard to

131 Ibid. p. 4. 132 Barbara Smail, “Organizing the curriculum to fit girls’ interests”, Science for Girls? , Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1987), p. 88. 133 Ibid. 134 Bob Campbell, Fred Lubben and Zelda Dlamini, “Learning science through contexts: helping pupils make sense of everyday situations”, International Journal of Science Education, 2000, Vol. 22, No. 3, p. 240. 135 Judith M Ramsden, “If it’s enjoyable, is it science?”, p. 71. 136 Ibid. p. 69. 137 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, p. 280.


27

visualize138, so SHAP uses practical activities to help students gain a greater

understanding of the underlying ideas.

PA: “I think just reading the theory isn’t good enough, you need to do the

practicals to be able to fully understand it.”

Educational research has shown that traditional, teacher-centred139, passive learning

activities140, such as copying notes from the board, “are of little educational value. …

Such work offers pupils little control over their own learning, and ultimately leads to

boredom, disenchantment and alienation.”141 By developing a range of learning

methods, not only are class activities more varied, but pupils begin to take a more

“active role in their learning experiences” 142. Their contributions are taken more

seriously and they feel more in control143.

TA: “[The course resources have] put the responsib ility more on to them for

their learning, rather than me on my teaching, and that’s a good thing,

especially in preparation for them going to university or off to work.”

P6: “It’s a lot more interactive. We do more, not just the experiments but just

the way it’s taught we do it more than write it. … It’s a much better way

to learn, it’s a lot more interesting than last year.”

138 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”, PhysicsWeb, March 2002, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/15/3/9/1 139 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Betty Dlamini, “Contextualizing science teaching in Swaziland: some student reactions”, International Journal of Science Education , 1996, Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 319. 140 Kendall Powell, “Spare me the lecture”, Nature, 18 September 2003, Vol. 425, pp. 234-236. 141 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 26. 142 Judith M Ramsden, “If it’s enjoyable, is it science?”, p. 65. 143 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Betty Dlamini, “Contextualizing science teaching in Swaziland: some student reactions”, pp. 314-315.


28

Despite shifting away from a traditional teacher-centred144 approach, teachers145,146,147

and their methods148 are still extremely important. Any changes in teaching styles rely

on “the attitude and approach of the individual teacher or department more than with the

subject or syllabus”149. Even with a course as intrinsically interesting as SHAP, the

teacher needs to inject enthusiasm and excitement. “If they just read the lessons from a

textbook then you are not going to like it.”150 I will address the link between classroom

practise and the way SHAP is viewed151 in more detail in Chapter 5.

3.4 Adjusting to AS after GCSE

For my interviewees, active learning seems to be a feature of A-levels rather than

GCSEs. When reflecting on GCSEs, the majority of both pupils and teachers, used the

word “spoon-fed” to describe the learning experience. I wanted to explore this by

briefly looking at GCSEs and their history. They first began in 1986. By 1989, the

National Curriculum had been introduced. This made Science, along with Mathematics

and English, a ‘core’ subject for ages 5 to 16152. Though some schools retained physics,

chemistry and biology as separate GCSEs, more and more schools began to adopt the

Dual Science GCSE. In this double-award, the difficulty of Physics was reduced to

144 Hunt and Russell (eds), Nuffield Science in Practice. GNVQ Science: Your questions answered, (London: Heinemann, 1994), p. 91. 145 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum” , p. 28. 146 Pauline Mills, “Never mind content, look at how physics is taught”. 147 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, p. 370. 148 J. Solbes and A. Vilches, “STS Interactions in the Teaching of Physics and Chemistry”, p. 384. 149 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 150 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”. 151 Researchers note that the relationship between teaching and students’ perceptions of the SHAP course needs further investigation: Fred Lubben and Bob Campbell, “Learners’ views of context -led physics curriculum materials”, p. 9. A paper presented for the ESERA Conference, Thessaloniki, August 2001. This paper reports Work in Progress. Not to be quoted without permission from Fred Lubben, [email protected] 152 Robin Millar and Jonathan Osborne (eds), Beyond 2000: Science education for the future, p. 2.


29

bring it into line with the other subjects153. Condensing three subjects into two GCSEs

meant simplifying and spoon-feeding concepts. However, this general, science-for-all

approach widened the gap between GCSE and A-level, and while more able students

coped154,155, many found the transition a “big jump in difficulty”156.

TB: “We spoon-feed them at GCSE … then all of a sudden you’ve got to

think and plan and decide and do things, and it’s not all there on a plate

and they’re lost … and you think “well how the hell can you teach a kid

these ideas when they’ve not actually thought about anything”, they’ve

managed to get As and Bs, but you can do that without having to really

think. So it is tough, and they do find it tough.”

Curriculum 2000 has attempted to close this gap, by using AS to ease students into this

new stage of learning. However, the SHAP course not only requires an increased depth

of knowledge, it requires a new style of learning. The more traditional thematic order of

physics concepts at GCSE has been replaced with a context- led approach. Many of the

pupils commented on their difficulties adapting to harder work and a new approach.

P8: “Well it’s much harder, I think cos we did Salters Horners course, which

was applied so it was kind of completely different, I don’t know whether

it’s just cos it was that course rather than because it was A-level. I think

generally it was just because it’s A-level, it’s just much harder, but

because it was the other course it was very strange!”

153 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, p. 111. 154 E Macfarlane, “Double award GCSE balanced science: its contribution to A-level success”, Physics Education, 1993, Vol. 28, pp. 362-365. 155 John Sears, “GCSE balanced science: A-level uptake and student attitudes”, Physics Education , 1993, Vol. 28, pp. 366-370. 156 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”.


30

3.5 Spiralling at speed

Having contexts first and then learning the physics behind them requires a spiral-

learning approach. Topics are revisited several times to reinforce understanding, in

theory. In practise, some interviewees157 were encountering problems with this

approach:

P8: “Instead of doing say a topic on waves and a topic on electricity, you do

a topic on archaeology and where electricity happens to fall in there you

do a little bit and you never really do any of the concepts in depth …

everything was just really vague”

In other studies, teachers claim that pupils fail to see the importance of repetition to help

consolidate learning. 158 Yet T1 was also experiencing problems with this approach:

T1 “The trouble is, because of this idea of revisiting topics, you skim. You

briefly touch things as a wave to it as you pass it down the corridor, and

then hope that they can fix on it for later, and if they pass it enough times

they might remember what it was. … I know they’re visiting it

elsewhere, but because I’m not teaching them it, I’m not sure they’ve

covered it … they’re doing it in another module somewhere with another

teacher.”

Though how much of his concerns are due to the course and how much to do with

adjusting to the new school and a new team-teaching scenario is tricky to ascertain.

157 This response was also made in the questionnaires: two girls from set 1 and four girls from set 2 of the all-girls school found the application-led approach difficult, preferring a more traditional order of topics. However, questionnaires were filled out in class time, so conferring may have occurred and influenced the frequency of responses. 158 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 27.


31

Another problem of the spiral- learning approach is the sheer amount of information that

needs to be covered in the time allowed, resulting from a “content-dominated and

overloaded curriculum”159. In a climate where performance tables are so highly

regarded, there is pressure on teachers to rush through the syllabus, focussing on only

the essentials to get the grades160.

TB: “There’s no way I can teach it in that time, so I cherry-pick. I think

“right, how can I best meet the specification needs”, “How can I get the

kids through the exam” really, that’s what it boils down to.”

This lack of time was a recurring theme in the interviews. Both pupils and teachers

struggle to cover the wealth of information in an academic year:

P3: “AS has been so crammed, rush, rush, rush, I mean we didn’t even finish

one of the units, we had to learn it ourselves on study leave”

PA: “I do definitely think we’re rushing though parts of it, at the end

especially. … sometimes it does get a bit difficult to cope with like

rushing and half not understanding you know.”

T1: “The course is very, very tight … I think there’s too much information

that goes too quickly. And I think they could quite easily stay on a few

core areas … you’re not quite sure, can I spend an extra week on this, no

I can’t, I need to get on to this, and it’s, it’s difficult.”

TB: “It is really a course where you’re always rushing, you can’t do anything

well, I feel, you can’t really go into things, in the AS, particularly,

because there’s just so much to cover in such a short period of time.”

159 Ibid. p. 26. 160 Ibid. p. 26.


32

An additional problem to rushing is a lack of time for reflection. Pupils need time and

space to absorb what they have learnt 161,162,163.

T1 “Salters Horners is throwing practicals at them left, right and centre. … I

don’t think there is time to reflect, but that could be because we’re so

rushed for time.”

3.6 Remember the physics

Increased practicals and less time for reflection can mean the associated understanding

may be lost. In such a situation, practicals are viewed as merely irrelevant fun. Studies

indicate that more enjoyable lessons do not always “correlate with a corresponding

increased interest in science”164.

P1: “I think a lot of [practicals] are a bit irrelevant … Especially in the Eat

topic we did lots of testing of sweets and stuff and I think it was just an

excuse to eat some food. I really do! It was just to make it fun, you

know, it was fun, but I just thought if I had have missed this lesson I

wouldn’t have had any catching up to do.”

PD: “There’s the fun lessons of course where we did stupid things, like mix

corn starch and water, and play with it.”

It’s always a problem that incorporating contexts may do nothing more than distract the

pupils, “drawing interest away from the physics”165. Some pupils can become context-

161 Ibid. p. 25. 162 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Betty Dlamini, “Contextualizing science teaching in Swaziland: some student reactions”, p. 317. 163 Nick Russell, “Unit 8: The basis of public knowledge. Children learning and children learning science”, p. 18. 164 Judith M Ramsden, “If it’s enjoyable, is it science?”, p. 69. 165 Fred Lubben and Bob Campbell, “Learners’ views of context -led physics curriculum materials”, p. 7.


33

focussed, “concerned only with aspects of the context and never with the subject

content”166:

TA: “They get so worried trying to understand the actual story if you like

about the Channel Tunnel and the rain getting in and this that and the

other, that they miss out on the sheer hard work of under-, of how to use

resistors … the course isn’t to learn about the Channel Tunnel, it’s to

learn electronics, electrical circuits of signalling and so on.”

However, studies indicate that as SHAP students gain more experience during A2, the

vast majority do recognise that contexts provide a bridge to the physics concepts they

need to learn167. What emerges by the end of Year 13 is that students have found the

contexts “both interesting and helpful to learning”168.

3.7 Something for everyone

When I first learnt how the course was structured, I wondered whether the contexts

were good choices. They had appealed to the course creators169, they had been

piloted170 and studies had assessed students’ responses to them171,172,173. At AS they had

studied six topics: Higher, Faster, Stronger; Technology in Space; The Sound of Music;

Digging Up the Past; Good Enough to Eat and Spare Part Surgery174. In my interviews I

166 Ibid. p. 6. 167 Ibid. p. 7. 168 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Contextualising the Physics Curriculum: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”, p. 8. 169 As mentioned by Elizabeth Swinbank in her interview, conducted via email. 170 Kerry Parker, Elizabeth Swinbank and Bernard Taylor, “Piloting Salters Horners Advancing Physics”, pp. 209-212. 171 Fred Lubben and Bob Campbell, “Learners’ views of context -led physics curriculum materials”. 172 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Contextualising the Physics Curriculu m: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”. 173 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Students’ ideas about interesting contexts in SHAP books I and II – An Interim Research Report”. 174 See Appendix 7 for an overview of each module and the physics it covers.


34

discovered that pupils and teachers were quite happy with the choice, mainly because of

the variety involved.

P3: “I think because we did six obviously it covers everybody’s different sort

of interests”

PA: “I think everyone has topics which they like more than others”

PB: “I enjoyed them all”

T2: “They do respond very well to the different units … there’s a lot in there

for everybody. … and if they don’t like a topic, it’ll only happen for a

month or so and they’ll be on to a different one won’t they! And they’re

always doing two at once, cos we teach two modules in parallel so it’s

not as if all their Physics is in that one module.”

ES: “usually one person’s pet hate is someone else’s favourite unit.”

Studies have shown that contexts appeal to students for a variety of different reasons:

“due to either an everyday, a career- information, a hobby- interest, a contentious, a

problem solving, or a practical-centred characteristic.”175

What appealed to many students, and also to the teachers, was the unexpected nature of

some of the contexts.

TA: “I think they’ve chosen a pretty good range of topics … the students …

don’t always expect to find Physics in sweet-making or archaeology.”

Students were given contexts they hadn’t really thought about, yet still found

interesting. Finding out new information excites them and spurs them on to learn more.

175 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Students’ ideas about interesting contexts in SHAP books I and II – An Interim Research Report”, p. 2.


35

P5: “AS Physics was explaining the Physics behind loads of different things

like musical instruments, which I’ve never actually thought about before,

but it’s quite interesting to learn about.”

PD: “Right now we’re learning about magnets and I wanna learn, cos I saw a

poster up on the wall about why magnets are magnets cos of the way like

the electrons spin or something, and I wanna learn about that, but we

haven’t got there yet, but I think we’re gonna do that this year.”

It was interesting to see their responses when asked what they would have liked to have

learnt but didn’t. Many mentioned topics that were due to come up in A2, implying that

“if they got the grades” (a major concern to them all) they were planning to continuing

the subject. But in addition, a number of responses mentioned that they didn’t miss what

they didn’t yet know.

PD: “I learnt most of the things I liked to learn about, the only thing is that, I

don’t know what’s out there, so I don’t know what I’m missing out on,

… every time they teach us something it’s something new that I didn’t

actually knew existed before they taught it to me.”

It was heart-warming to see the enthusiasm for learning that many of these pupils

seemed to have. They had a thirst to discover more about the unknown176.

The variety of topics within the SHAP AS course means that examples have been used

which appeal to both girls and boys177. It has taken on board that “pupils do not come

176 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 27. 177 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, pp. 280-281.


36

fresh to science but have differing degrees of relevant experience”178. In studies about

what appeals to the different genders, boys enjoy learning about forces, cars and flight,

girls are keener on light and electricity, and both boys and girls enjoy learning about

space179. Because of the number of females that I had interviewed, I felt it was

important to consider how those interviewees had felt about the different aspects of their

AS. It was time to consider the female perspective.

178 Ibid. p. 277. 179 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 27.


37

CHAPTER 4 – SWEETNESS AND LIGHT:

THE FEMALE PERSPECTIVE

4.1 Girls and physics

Why do we need more women in science? Back in Chapter 2, graph 2.2 showed that

over the last twenty years, the percentage of girls choosing physics A-level has

remained static. During this time, many initiatives have emerged attempting to get more

girls into physics180, but why? The feminists argue that encouraging girls into science

would increase their choices and employment opportunities. It would also aid girls as

members of a technological society181, matching the scientific-citizen argument from

chapter 2. In addition, the scientific community argues that it needs to attract the best

brains, and cannot afford to neglect 50% of the population in its quest for

intelligence182,183. But despite these arguments, percentages are static. However, over

the last twenty years, the numbers of girls has not always fallen184. To me, the most

striking feature about graph 2.1 in chapter 2 is not the declines, but the huge difference

between the numbers of girls and boys choosing physics. Perhaps a different angle

might be to ask why so many boys choose physics.

180 Projects include Women In Science and Technology (WISE) and the Athena Project, at http://www.etechb.co.uk/athena, as mentioned in: Royal Society, “Media Release: Royal Society Athena Awards recognise gender and equality work”, Royal Society, 18 March 2004, at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/releasedetails.cfm?file=514.txt 181 Alison Kelly, “Introduction”, Science for Girls? , Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1987), pp. 7-8. 182 PhysicsWeb, “Physics needs women”. 183 Institute of Physics, “Press Release: The number of girls taking AS and A level physics continues to fall”. 184 See graph 2.1 in Chapter 2, and Appendix 5.


38

One explanation is that physics has been taught using masculine185 experiences,

interests and concerns. The result is that girls feel that their world is far removed from

the world of science186. They are however interested in areas of science that affect them

personally187. If science could build upon girls’ existing interests, it may have greater

appeal188.

4.2 Sweetness…

It appeared to me that the SHAP course had met this demand. It was a course built on

such a variety of interests that the stereotypical boy and girl, and everything in between,

would find something of interest.

TA: “The pupils find it pretty motivating … the girls as well, more so perhaps

than they did in the past, cos the older traditional courses could be pretty

dry, and you had to be an enthusiast to keep on with it, whereas these

courses are often quite intrinsically interesting.”

What came across in the interviews at the all-girls school was the success on one

particular topic: “Good Enough to Eat”189. Elizabeth Swinbank claims that she often

incorporates the “simple and memorable demonstrations”190 into her talks at SHAP

teacher conferences. Teacher T2 commented on how much the girls enjoyed “playing

with the sweets”191. But what was striking was the number of students at that school

who mentioned the Eat module. With the exception of P7, who was more interested in 185 Helen Haste, “Nestle Social Research Programme. Science in My Future: a study of values and beliefs in relation to science and technology amongst 11-21 year olds”, at http://www.spreckley.co.uk/nestle/science-in-my-future-full.pdf, p. 3. 186 Beverley Bell, “The role of schools in providing a background knowledge of science”, p. 52. 187 Helen Haste, “Nestle Social Research Programme. Science in My Future: a study of values and beliefs in relation to science and technology amongst 11-21 year olds”, p. 23. 188 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, p. 281. 189 Elizabeth Swinbank, “Good enough to eat”, pp. 52-57. 190 Quoted from Elizabeth Swinbank interview, conducted via email. 191 Quoted fro m T2 interview.


39

the CD player, and P1, who dismissed the Eat practicals as irrelevant fun, every other

interviewed student at the all-girls school sang the praises of the Eat topic. As well as

the sheer enjoyment of playing with the sweets, they could easily recall the underlying

physics concepts. They were using the contexts as bridges to the physics, a trait which

studies show girls are better at than boys 192.

P2: “It’s just different! You wouldn’t expect going to Physics that you’d start

eating liquorice and checking out its tensile strength!”

P3: “You actually got to test stuff … cos we were doing actual practicals,

you sort of stick more in your head. Like with sugar laces … you add

weights and things to do the force and extension graph … and Hooke’s

law.”

P5: “We got given all these different sweets to test hardness and toughness

and, well not durability, all of those different chemical and physical

properties. I enjoyed that.”

P8: “We did a lot of testing … of chocolate and things … there’s the Brinell

hardness test … and viscosity … with honey and syrup … bone

replacement using Crunchie bars … we got to eat the leftovers …

stretching strawberry and cola laces so yeah the practicals were, involved

lots of eating!”

Sweets were clearly a topic close to the girls’ hearts, but as well as that, these responses

highlight the number of experiments they had performed in this unit. When other

modules were mentioned, a few of the interviewees lamented that there had not been

more experiments, as they would have found the units more exciting. This indicates that

the enthusiasm is not just for the subject matter, but also for the novelty and the active

192 Fred Lubben and Bob Campbell, “Learners’ views of context -led physics curriculum materials”, p. 9.


40

approach to learning. Indeed practical sessions are important aspects in changing girls’

attitudes to physics.193

Another interesting factor is that not one student at the mixed school mentioned this

topic, either on the questionnaires or the interviews. This indicates how the course is

being moulded by different schools. Responses from both schools seemed equally

enthusiastic about SHAP, but time constraints and teacher preferences meant that their

experiences of studying the same units are different. Teachers pick and choose from a

wealth of resources, so a degree of flexibility can emerge in what, on first sight, looks a

fairly rigid course that sticks closely to the textbook. The all-girls school clearly picked

a great many experiments from the Eat unit, undoubtedly for a whole number of

reasons: resources, enjoyment, novelty, ease etc.

Since this distinction between the two schools has emerged, it is worth addressing the

studies that claim “girls in single-sex schools are more likely to choose physics or

physical science and mathematics than their co-educated sisters”194. Some girls reject

the idea that boys and teachers deter them from studying science195. But to some extent

an all-girls school could challenge the suggested masculine image of science196, by

gearing lessons more to the interests of the pupils. However, comparing single and

mixed sex schools is just as difficult as comparing SHAP with other current syllabuses

– you can’t do a control on one child. I can’t predict whether if I had gone to a mixed

school I would still have gone on to study physics. A mixed environment may be

193 Barbara Smail, “Encouraging girls to give physics a second chance”, p. 117. 194 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, p. 101. 195 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 326. 196 Alison Kelly, “Why girls don’t do science”, p. 15.


41

incredibly motivating for the more competitive female physics student: “It makes me

feel like an individual … We’re a lot more competitive with the boys in all our classes

… There are so many of them that we feel we have something to prove.”197

Studies into the effects of single-sex classes in mixed schools 198 concern me. They force

a distinction between science and other subjects, and between males and females,

creating an extremely artificial environment for the pupils. They have chosen mixed

schooling, so why impose single-sex restrictions? It worries me when gender issues are

thrust to the foreground in an attempt to simplify a very complex situation. There are so

many other factors to consider, the school environment, the teachers, the pupils

themselves. I realise the irony of this statement in a chapter devoted to gender issues.

However, my excess of female responses and the wealth of gender articles concerning

physics meant I wanted to focus on this issue, to then stress my feelings towards its

overly simplistic framework. In any case, my qualitative analysis, by its nature, cannot

be extrapolated to discuss how all girls view the course. It can however explore the

girls’ responses to see some reasons why they had chosen SHAP and how they had

responded to the different aspects.

4.3 …and light

Aside from the Eat practicals, coursework was another factor in responses from the all-

girls school. SHAP AS students have to set up two experiments and then write them up

for coursework. Of the eight girls questioned at that school, six mentioned a piece of

coursework involving polarisation, but of these, four could not remember the other 197 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”. 198 Eileen Gillibrand, Peter Robinson, Richard Brawnard and Albert Osborn, “Girls’ participation in physics in single sex classes in mixed schools in relation to confidence and achievement”, pp. 349-362.


42

experiment they had done. The polarisation experiment was the second and thus more

recent piece, but both had been performed in the same term. This experiment was again

in the “Good Enough to Eat” section, and in addition included light, a topic that appeals

to girls199. Sweetness and light were the two topics that these interviewed girls recalled

again and again. But this recall is two-fold. Not only are they interested in the subject,

the majority also enjoyed the coursework itself.

In the past assessment consisted of one exam at the end of the two-year course. Now,

modular exams and coursework allow for continuous assessment. Some claim this

approach works in girls’ favour200, whatever the case it has been well received by both

teachers and students. With coursework, students can carefully plan, prepare and present

work that is relevant to their “own context, experience and interests” 201. The practical

aspect itself can also be motivating and enjoyable202.

However, when coursework was first introduced, it encountered resistance. The

government did not confidently rely on teacher assessment203. They were suspicious

that coursework was easier than an exam and it was “in danger of undermining the

rigorous standard of the A level qualification”204. Teachers, however, maintained that

coursework “was not eroding standards and was certainly not an easy option”205.

Concerning pupil enjoyment of the coursework, my questionnaires and interviews

199 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 27. 200 Tim Miles and Paul Sims, “Boys work out a way to narrow gender gap”, Evening Standard , 19 August 2004, p. 16. 201 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 202 Ibid. 203 Ibid. 204 Ibid. 205 Ibid.


43

showed a mixed response. While many favoured the independence of an investigation,

some struggled with choosing topics, with equipment and with time constraints. An

assessed piece of work will always carry the associated stresses, but on the whole

attitudes to coursework, from both girls and boys, were positive. The third piece of

coursework, however, was possibly the most interesting – the visit.

4.4 In search of role models

SHAP has taken a novel and highly effective approach to school visits. It has upgraded

them to form the basis of compulsory, assessed coursework206. Optional visits risk being

dropped due to time constraints, so adding the visit to the assessment structure helps it

to be taken more seriously207. The AS students get actively involved in the visit,

formulating questions and taking notes in an attempt to focus on two physics principles

observed “in action”208. They then have a fortnight to complete a 1,000-word visit

report, in the style of a feature article or a news piece209 aimed at a GCSE level

student 210. This component of the course tests a wide range of skills that other

assessment methods may neglect. Not only does this test their communication skills, it

tests literacy, critical thinking, computer skills 211 and creativity212. Representing 10% of

206 Christina Astin, Nick Fisher and Bernard Taylor, “Finding physics in the real world: how to teach physics effectively with visits”, Physics Education , January 2002, Vol. 37, No. 1, p. 18. 207 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Sylvia Hogarth, “Assessment through reports of ‘physics-in-action’ visits”, School Science Review, June 2001, Vol. 82, No. 301, p. 51. 208 Ibid. p. 47. 209 Ibid. p. 47. 210 Christina Astin, Nick Fisher and Bernard Taylor, “Finding physics in the real world: how to teach physics effectively with visits”, p. 19. 211 Ibid. p. 19. 212 Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell and Sylvia Hogarth, “Assessment through reports of ‘physics-in-action’ visits”, p. 51.


44

the total AS or 5% of the A2, it reflects the “relative importance of communication as

an assessment objective” 213.

Most importantly, by making visits assessed, teachers can justify showing the students

physics in real life214. This helps students appreciate the excitement and relevance of

physics215. It stimulates their interest, perhaps even sparking ideas of a career in science.

Seeing experts talking enthusiastically about their subject has “a much stronger impact

on students than any number of glossy career brochures” 216.

“Real- life professionals are the best advertisements for careers in science …

[they] convey a powerful sense of relevance of … courses … they can inspire

following generations.”217

The realisation that physicists are “regular people doing really interesting things and

they don’t wear lab coats”218, helps to break down the stereotypes. Female role models

are lacking in science219, visits can introduce girls to female physicists in an appealing,

inspiring way.

The all-girls school had chosen to visit the Astrium in Stevenage, where they had learnt

about satellites including Beagle 2. Though many found scribbling notes to be quite

stressful, the majority gave extremely positive responses to the visit. A great number of

213 Ibid. p. 52. 214 Ibid. p. 51. 215 Bill Hicks, “Forces at work”, Times Education Supplement Teacher Magazine, 4 April 2003, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub-section=TES+Teacher&id=378003&Type=0 216 Christina Astin, Nick Fisher and Bernard Taylor, “Finding physics in the real world: how to teach physics effectively with visits”, p. 19. 217 Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society Education Committee”. 218 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”. 219 Ibid.


45

students were now interested in space, though whether due to the visit or the appeal of

the subject itself is difficult to assess220.

The mixed school visit had looked at medical physics in action. The choice of venue

hadn’t appealed to everyone 221 but had clearly been extremely motivating to some:

PA: “[We went] to the National Institute for Medical Research, yeah [laughs]

where I’m going to work … I mean in some ways I always knew about

it, but when I visited the Institute … it was a stimulation for me … I got

to see the place a bit more and so I went ahead and applied. … We’ll be

working with scientists on special projects over the summer.”

Though focussing on the female responses in this chapter, gender is only part of the

picture. In the responses I received, girls were indeed finding the course appealing. But

I believe that has more to do with the course than with the gender of the pupils. The

nature of SHAP appears to be attracting a new type of student.

220 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 27. 221 PC wanted to travel further away, but when questioned didn’t really mind where. PD felt that the visit was more about biology than physics, so would have preferred a more physics-based visit.


46

CHAPTER 5 – ATTRACTING A NEW TYPE OF STUDENT

5.1 Infectious enthusiasm

For students to find science appealing, they need to “feel good about learning science

and about science itself”222. Feelings and attitudes towards a subject are extremely

influential. Creating the right attitude can depend on the teacher, the science

department, the whole school environment. Changing pupils’ attitudes cannot happen

overnight, it may take several years to build feeling and confidence in a school, relying

on older pupils influencing and appealling to the younger years223.

Though piloted in 1998, Edexcel have only officially been running SHAP since

September 2000. At the same time, Curriculum 2000 was introduced in an attempt to

broaden A-levels. In terms of students, there are only three full A- level year-groups to

look at (2000-2002, 2001-2003 and 2002-2004). However, I still wanted to examine the

statistics to see if any trends were emerging, and compare these trends to the total

numbers choosing physics. Below are two graphs. The first shows the number of SHAP

candidates at AS and A2 including gender numbers. The second shows the number of

total UK candidates choosing AS and A2 physics, as well as gender breakdowns.

222 Beverley Bell, “The role of schools in providing a background knowledge of science”, p. 54. 223 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, p. 276.


47

Graph 5.1 Numbers and gender breakdown of SHAP students taking AS and A2 (2000-2004)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

2000-2002 2001-2003 2002-2004 2003-2005

Years

Nu

mb

er o

f C

and

idat

es

Male AS

Female AS

Toal AS

Male A2

Female A2

Total A2

Graph 5.2 Numbers and gender breakdown of A-level physics students taking AS and A2

(2000-2004)

05000

1000015000200002500030000350004000045000

2000-2002 2001-2003 2002-2004 2003-2005

Years

Nu

mb

er o

f C

and

idat

es

Male ASFemale ASTotal ASMale A2Female A2

Total A2


48

Undoubtedly it’s extremely bad practise to draw too many conclusions from such a

small amount of data, but there are some aspects to discuss. What graph 5.1 indicates is

that SHAP AS and A2 numbers have increased for both genders, whereas in graph 5.2

AS fluctuates but A2 falls. Fair enough, the numbers are widely different, SHAP is new

and this novelty factor may be to its advantage 224.

Both graphs show that many more boys are taking the subject than girls, and their sheer

numbers, which are decreasing in A-level physics generally, are affecting the totals far

more than the fairly constant, smaller intake of girls. Courses need to appeal to both

genders. Targeting females to boost numbers must not be done at the expense of losing

more males, and thus creating more drastic drops in totals.

As a proportion of the total candidates, SHAP has slightly more girls than the national

average 225. However, because the numbers are so much smaller in graph 5.1 than graph

5.2, a higher percentage of females could be a result of targeting strategies of SHAP.

For SHAP, Female A2 figures remain static, but more are choosing the subject for AS.

Perhaps indicating the AS appeal in the broader climate. Perhaps different types of

students are choosing it.

Statistics aside, I want to examine the two schools that I visited. As I mentioned, it can

take several years for attitudes to change towards a subject. SHAP has only officially

been running for three, is it too early to discover anything? On a grand scale, possibly,

but on a small, qualitative, case-study scale, I wanted to see how SHAP was impacting

224 Jeremy Higham, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”. 225 See Appendix 8 for tabulated figures of numbers and percentages of candidates.


49

on these schools. Both had slight advantages. The all-girls school had been a pilot

school. SHAP had been running there since 1998, so five year-groups had experienced

it rather than three. In the mixed school, its specialist science status allows it to focus

and increase emphasis on science. Inevitably this increases pupils’ awareness of

science, as well as seeing the improved resources, and the positive outreach work into

the community226. The mixed school had also introduced Salters Horners Chemistry

about six years ago, so in the time that had passed the physicists could see the positive

effects, and be more open and trusting of SHAP. Teacher TA also mentioned that a

governor was interesting in teaching physics through application, and his

encouragement aided moving to SHAP. It is a big move to change to a syllabus of this

kind. All the interviewed teachers expressed that the decision needs careful thought.

Such a reinvention requires teachers to learn new concepts, and requires technicians to

become familiar with new resources. Schools need to buy and build apparatus for such a

practically focussed course. A great deal of time, effort and money is required to

implement SHAP. So why did these teachers get involved, how were they persuaded

that SHAP was a good idea?

A current problem with science teachers is not only recruiting them but retaining them.

To do this requires better on-the-job training, as well as keeping them up-to-date with

226 An aspect of this status involves outreaching into the commu nity. The school has, among other things, opened up its science laboratories to visits from primary schools, and encouraged local astronomy groups to use its facilities during out-of-school hours.


50

contemporary science227. Above all else, teachers need to be enthusiastic about their

subject228.

“…the curriculum is not unimportant … But without lively teachers, with the

time and inclination to teach physics in a stimulating manner, few students will

become ‘switched on’ to physics or engineering.”229

Science teachers are a valuable resource, and SHAP took this on board from the start.

From the early 1990s, UYSEG held consultation meetings with teachers, they helped

contribute expertise. They gave inputs concerning experiments, some even helped write

the textbooks. It was a pooling of resources, and it paid off. Now SHAP holds teacher

and technician training courses for newcomers. There are online support groups, as well

as central support. They are given a wealth of resources: teacher guides, technician

guides, student worksheets, CD-Roms etc. All this support, especially the teacher

courses, has injected a huge amount of enthusiasm:

TB: “I was actually sent on a course, which is [laughs] luxury, where we saw

lots of experiments, spoke to other teachers, learnt a bit about the AS

course … The support, the resources … are brilliant … it’s all there …

it’s just finding the time to go and find it … there’s lots of other support

as well, if you get onto the websites … I mean I never do! But I know

it’s there.”

The teachers felt valued and supported, and by meeting enthusiastic teachers at the

courses, they were excited about the subject, and happier to devote time and effort to

learning the new, interesting concepts:

227 Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society Education Committee”. 228 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 28. 229 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, p. 370.


51

TA: “I still enjoy learning more about things, and, I therefore didn’t regret

having to find the time to do that, and I enjoyed finding out more and

found it quite fascinating.”

The enthusiasm seems infectious, teachers are inspired by the training courses and

support, and their enthusiasm feeds back into their teaching, getting the pupils more

excited about the subject:

T1 “If you’re happy with the course … the kids know you’re happy … so

they become more enthusiastic about it as well. … [T2] likes it … since

her time here the numbers of girls doing physics has increased … she’s

very, very enthusiastic about the course and maybe that’s made a

difference … it’s either the course or it’s [T2], or it’s both.”

TA: “Numbers have gone up in Physics quite steadily over the last three or

four years, but the school has become increasingly a very strong science

school, we’ve had some fantastic teachers in the science department, so

that’s helped a great deal.”

All four interviewed teachers were enthusiastic about their subject and had studied

physics. However, increasing in schools this is not the case. Less physics graduates are

choosing teaching, and non-specialists are teaching a subject they are less confident or

passionate about. It would have been interesting to see how non-specialists are fairing

with SHAP. The resources are excellent, the subject matter is engaging, but SHAP calls

for time and effort on the part of any teacher that undertakes it. I’d like to think that

SHAP would fair better than traditional courses. Its relevance to reality and the support


52

given would help non-specialists get to grips and be interested in the course they were

teaching. But without any exposure to this situation, I can only speculate.

Another reason teachers can get enthusiastic about the course, is that they know the

pupils will enjoy it. Teaching a motivating course to students gets the teachers

motivated too. And the pup ils are indeed enthusiastic about the course. In yet more

infectious enthusiasm, they pass this on to the lower years:

TA: “The Year 11 pupils have Year 12 students talking to them about their

subjects informally, without teachers present and I think the impressions

they get by talking to the Year 12 Physicists is that it is an interesting and

good course to follow. … I think that’s why numbers have increased.”

5.2 A new type of student

With increased enthusiasm and increased numbers, new students are choosing AS

physics, who in the past may have avoided it. At the visited schools, I wanted to look at

the new types of students SHAP was attracting. According to previous research230,231,

SHAP students fit four different categories: context- focussed, subject-focussed, context

and subject focussed and those who use contexts as a bridge to the subject. Previous

physics A-level courses had attracted subject-focused students. “For such subject

focussed students the physics itself may be a sufficient interest and an adequate stimulus

to learning”232. To increase the numbers doing A-level physics, the SHAP course

230 Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Fred Lubben, “Contextualising the Physics Curriculum: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”, p. 5. 231 Fred Lubben and Bob Campbell, “Learners’ views of context -led physics curriculum materials”, p. 6. 232 Ibid. p. 9.


53

needed to appeal to more than just this subject- focused, traditional pupil. As a result,

new types of students are now choosing the course:

P3: “[On the open day the Physics topics] looked really interesting, to be

honest only two of them have been. … It’s probably just cos I was

looking at the pretty pictures and what have you … It was a lot harder

than I originally thought.”

P4: “I don’t understand it but I’m glad that I did it because it’s really

enjoyable. I know I’m not going to get a good grade, but it doesn’t really

matter because I can get good grades in other subjects. I’m just very

interested in finding out how things work and stuff like that.”

P5: “I wasn’t going to do Physics AS level but then I swapped a month into

the course because everyone seemed to like the AS Physics class. … I

was going to give up Physics at AS level … but I’ve now decided I want

to do Physics A-level, because it’s a bit fun so, I’ve never had any plans

to do Physics, but I just continue with it, cos I’m enjoying it!”

In P3s case the marketing had an effect, in P4 it was interest rather than ability that

attracted her to the course. P5 was initially influenced by peers then found the course

engaging. P5 in particular was a bright pupil who plans to continue with biology. The

links she found between SHAP and biology meant she found it useful, and enjoyable, to

continue SHAP to A2. These new pupils are not going to be the physicists of the future,

but they are gaining experience of physics at this level, and embracing the broader

curriculum framework. SHAP has enabled them to do this.


54

5.3 New skills, new assessment

At both schools, the positive responses have not only affected numbers, the grades have

also improved. This could be because a positive attitude correlates to greater

comprehension233 and a greater enthusiasm to study. Or it could be the way SHAP is

assessed.

When interviewing pupils about their exams, a number of themes emerged. Mainly

SHAP seemed to be breaking physics’ strong bond with maths234, to create a more

stand-alone image. Exam questions seemed aimed at a different type of candidate.

PD: “It was more essay questions this year. I prefer the maths questions.”

PA: “Maths calculations I’m fine with, but it’s just written explanations I find

it, I think there’s a separate way you need to think to be able to write the

written explanations.”

Gender studies have shown that girls are better at essay-type questions than boys235,236,

but the approach itself is useful for both genders as it tests understanding237. However,

physics attracts students who like mathematics238. With good numerical skills, they may

have a lower level of literacy or a slower reading speed239. In the past physics with its

heavy emphasis on mathematics, would not have posed a problem. With increased

emphasis on comprehension and application, traditional pupils may struggle.

233 J. Solbes and A. Vilches, “STS Interactions in the Teaching of Physics and Chemistry”, p. 385. 234 Victoria Neumark, “Physics needs maths”, Times Educational Supplement, 1 January 1999, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=News+%26+opinion&id=82404&Type=0 235 Alison Kelly, “Why girls don’t do science”, p. 14. 236 Jan Harding, “Sex differences in science examinations”, p. 203. 237 Barbara Smail, “Organizing the curriculum to fit girls’ interests”, p. 87. 238 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, p. 107. 239 Geoffrey Cantor, “Teaching Philosophy and HPS to Science Students”, PRS-LTSN Journal, Summer 2001, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14-24.


55

TA: “I just wonder whether a more sort of plodding Physicist who

understands the Physics but finds it hard to envisage different situations,

would look at it and get a bit of a panic and not feel they could answer

the question, which the Physics of which actually is quite

straightforward, and if it was asked in a more straightforward way they

could answer it quite easily.”

Whereas in the past, physics may have tested numerical skills far more than others,

SHAP indicates that in this broader climate, a wider range of skills are necessary and

now form part of the assessment through coursework and examinations. Students are

thus emerging as more rounded individuals, with more transferable skills.

5.4 Repackaging

With its new, more rounded assessment and its context-led approach, SHAP has to

some degree reinvented and repackaged physics. The content is still there, it still

conforms to QCA’s guidelines, but the approach and assessment are new and

innovative. This repackaging has updated the physics, making it more relevant and

appealing. But does this repackaging pose a problem to the students? To some it does,

P1 felt the physics principles were being disguised, and P8 found the application-

theory-application nature of SHAP confusing. Being taught the theory from one

application, then another, then assessed using another was difficult for some students to

grasp. With so much reinvention to the course, how has it effected students’ perceptions

of physics? What was, in fact, the nature of A-level physics both within SHAP and in

the wider context?


56

CHAPTER 6 – A-LEVEL PHYSICS RE-BRANDED

6.1 What is Physics?

SHAP’s practical, context-led approach has made A-level physics more relevant to the

daily lives of students. By incorporating aspects of technology, the subject has become

less abstract. How has it affected the way the students perceive physics as a subject? I

asked the interviewees “What is Physics?”. The main response was that it was “how

things worked”240. In addition, all four pupils from the mixed school said that physics

was involved with everything around them. PD felt physics gave him a different

perspective on the world and PA’s response was the most enthusiastic:

PA: “Physics is related with everything … you walk, there’s Physics, you

speak, there’s Physics … the way a plant moves is related with Physics,

the way we move is related with Physics, gravity itself is Physics … how

we are put on this planet is Physics, you know.”

P8 was happier to say what physics wasn’t, she felt it was whatever was left after

biology and chemistry had been assigned. P2 thought physics was very theoretical, full

of set equations and tests that will work in theory and “if they don’t it must be

something you’ve done”241. To P2, physics gave to straight answers, unlike biology

which was more “shifty”242. P5 felt physics “tries to explain the world around you using

basic equations. It’s like Maths [except] … you have to go out and collect data for the

equations.”243 These SHAP students have realised the relevance of physics. Learning by

240 P1, P3, P4, P6, P7 and PD all gave this response. 241 Quoted from P2 interview. 242 Ibid. 243 Quoted from P5 interview.


57

application has let them draw connections to the subject and appreciate it. But does

making physics more real and less abstract actually have detrimental effects on the

status of physics?

6.2 Destroying the elite?

Physics’ reputation as a “difficult” 244 subject is bitter sweet. On the one hand physicists

try to make their subject more appealing, but on the other hand they rather enjoy their

elitist status 245. Small numbers pursuing physics makes the subject seem more

unobtainable246, requiring intelligence to master it247. As a result, people see it as a

prestigious subject, with high academic status 248 that looks great on a CV249. Some

students enjoy this status, finding the challenge rewarding250. Some choose to do

physics because it makes them feel intelligent 251. If SHAP courses are appealing to

more people, they are appealing to a wider range of abilities. Weaker students are

motivated by the contexts. But does this wider appeal mean that physics will become

devalued?

244 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, pp. 323 and 326. 245 Mark Elise and Jonathan Osbourne, “Should physics be more elitist?”, PhysicsWeb, January 2004, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/17/1/7 246 A point made by Hearn in the Discussion section after Beverley Bell, “The role of schools in providing a background knowledge of science”, pp. 62-63. 247 Brian Ridley, “Are physicists useful?”, PhysicsWeb, December 2001, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/14/12/2/1 248 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 24. 249 Kate Hilpern, “Life, the universe and everything”, The Independent, Physicist, a special supplement produced in association with Institute of Physics, 9 October 2003, p. 3. 250 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum” , p. 28, and P3 also said this when interviewed. 251 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”.


58

“The Department of Education report suggests that ‘science and technology

would have to change out of all recognition and possibly to its detriment, to

attract the non-science students.”252

Schemes to incorporate technology and society into science have faced opposition from

teachers and universities, concerned that it will devalue the subject253. Indeed people use

the example of domestic science’s status compared to ‘proper’ science, to explain how

real- life connections can devalue a qualification254. There will always be some people

who either dislike science or prefer other subjects. Why should physics try to attract

more students?

6.3 Realism

This leads us back to the arguments in 2.3. There, the arguments for getting more

people to study physics were for citizens, economics and future training. Economics and

future training imply the retention of physics’ superior status. The citizen argument

requires a broader appeal. In addition, Curriculum 2000 has sought to broaden A-levels.

With mixed demands on A-level physics, it’s worth re-examining these arguments.

Firstly, the informed citizen argument is a powerful one. It is currently helping to

introduce a “Science in the 21st Century” GCSE255,256 and launch Sciencewise257, a new

government initiative to promote public engagement with science. It was even an

252 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 327. 253 P. James Gaskell, “Authentic science and school science”, p. 269. 254 Alison Kelly, “Retrieving the missing half”, p. 285. 255 BBC.co.uk, “New science lessons for young citizens”, BBC.co.uk , 9 January 2003, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2642745.stm 256 BBC.co.uk, “Science pupils want more ideas”, BBC.co.uk , 24 November 2003, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3234260.stm 257 Launched 6th September 2004 at the BA Festival of Science in Exeter, for more information see http://www.sciencewise.org.uk


59

argument that helped to set up this MSc course. But the question is, does the SHAP

approach help students to be more scientific citizens? On the surface it would appear so,

interviewees appeared to realise the relevance of the subject by learning this context

approach. Yet it is still within the confines of an academic classroom context. TA noted

that the contexts used in SHAP are somewhat distorted to incorporate the necessary

physics, resulting in a degree of artificiality. In fact, when tested, everyday contexts in

school science did not always mean school science was applied to everyday

situations 258. But this is such a qualitative issue, how do you measure scientific

citizenship? You don’t. A quest like this could just run and run259. The fact that more

pupils are choosing SHAP, many of which will drop it either after AS or A2, means that

it’s fitting the scientific citizen argument’s aims.

The second argument is an economic one. To some extent SHAP is meeting this aim,

it’s promoting the applications of physics via the textbook contexts and the visit,

thereby making students more aware of the career options open to them. However, the

argument that we need more scientists for our economy is to some extent building false

hope. In the UK, biotechnology is thriving, physics is not260. Careers in science and

technology have “low status, relatively low pay and modest career prospects” 261. For

law graduates starting salaries are around £30,000, but for science you find jobs needing

“a degree, a doctorate and two years post-doc experience … which pay £19,000 and …

258 Bob Campbell, Fred Lubben and Zelda Dlamini, “Learning science through contexts: helping pupils make sense of everyday situations”, pp. 249-250. 259 At least that will keep the science communicators busy. 260 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, p. 372. 261 Ibid. p. 369.


60

only last for 22 months”262. An economic argument breaks down when you examine

reality, “the career opportunities are not there”263.

This leads on to the third argument of training the next generation of physicists.

Realistically “more than half of those students studying physics at any level will not

move on to the next level at the end of their course … physics education must involve

much more than training the next generation of physicists”264.

What we have here is a powerful, yet vague, citizen argument, and two unrealistic

arguments concerning economy and training. Add to this the Curriculum 2000 aims and

you can see where A-levels are heading. Breadth is the future, and physics needs to

improve its image in a competitive market of AS subjects. It can do this by adopting the

approaches of SHAP and the Institute of Physics Advancing Physics course265. Like

SHAP, the IOP course updates physics, yet rather than put contexts first, it retains a

more topic-based approach266,267. But what both courses do is stress the relevance of the

subject, and its multiple roles in society. They also stress the wide range of career

options open to physics students. Many science students are aware of this, and choose

the subject to enhance their career prospects268,269. However non-scientists do not realise

262 Vivienne Parry, “Don’t mention the S-word”. 263 Brian E. Woolnough, “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, p. 374. 264 Peter Rodgers, “New dimensions in education”. 265 Becky Parker, “The A-team”, Times Educational Supplement, 8 September 2000, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=Curriculum+specials&id=338234&Type=0 266 Jon Ogborn, “New hope for physics education”, Physicsweb, October 1999, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/12/10/7 267 Becky Parker, “Fresh approach to A-level physics”, Times Educational Supplement, 5 September 2003, at http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=TES+Teacher&id=383375&Type=0 268 Valerie Jamieson, “Learning lessons from the classroom”.


61

the potential opportunities270,271. Since few students continue to degree level, why not

make this stage enjoyable, interesting and relevant, teaching pupils a wide range of

skills.

Do the new skills being assessed neglect the more traditional student? No, a traditional

student still has the physics concepts. Their subject- focussed manner means they will

still get a great deal from the course, and in addition will learn other valuable,

transferable skills such as communication and comprehension.

What about the elite status of physics? Will the subject be devalued with this broader

appeal? I believe no. Of the thirty questionnaire responses, only two students were

certain about pursuing physics to degree level. Couple this with the broadening of A-

levels and you realise that the elitism is still there, it is simply shifted to degree level. To

avoid becoming the “new Latin”, physics A-level has had to move with the times. Even

with the elite status of a physics degree, many universities are now combining the

course with other sub jects, creating wider appeal and highlighting the diverse range of

subjects that physics can relate to. What can’t be underestimated is the enthusiasm that I

saw in the interviewed pupils and teachers. That spark is the most important thing. That

is what will keep teachers teaching their subject with passion and enthusiasm, and

perhaps even inspire a new generation of teachers to emerge from the students

themselves. With only three full year-groups to examine, and only a small selection of

qualitative responses, I can’t extrapolate and predict whether this course will endure, but

269 Jonathan Osborne and Sue Collins, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum”, p. 24. 270 Neil Havard, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, p. 327. 271 Julia King, “Young physicists being turned off”.


62

even if it doesn’t, the excitement and novel approaches it has explored should surely be

built upon in the future.

6.4 Tomlinson and the future of A-level physics

But future plans for SHAP are on ice at the moment272. In fact all A- levels are on ice,

awaiting the Tomlinson report due out next month. In 2002, the first group of

Curriculum 2000 students received their results. The event was described as a

“fiasco”273, and as a result Mike Tomlinson, former Chief Inspector of schools, was

given the task of investigating the situation. In December 2002, he produced his

inquiry274. Then, at the beginning of 2004, he produced an interim report. But the final

report, due in October, will outline proposals for “overhauling exams and the

curriculum”275. His recommendations will be phased in over the next ten years, but at

this stage the only rumour is a possible 4,000-word dissertation that A-level students

may have to do for university entrance276,277. If a reality, this dissertation will be

compulsory and parts of the existing coursework will be dropped to make room for this

extended essay278. In SHAP’s case this may mean the end of practical investigations or

of inspirational visits, and all to quench the claims that A-levels have got easier. I

believe these claims are false, the students that I met still struggled with the transition

from a spoon-fed, dual-science GCSE to A-level. To conform to QCA regulations, their

272 Taken from Elizabeth Swinbank interview, conducted over email. 273 The Guardian, “The Tomlinson report: The key points”, The Guardian, 3 December 2002, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4559738-110914,00.html 274 Mike Tomlinson, Inquiry into A level Standards (London: Inquiry into A level Standards, December 2002). 275 Polly Curtis, “Dissertation could determine university offers”, The Guardian, 19 August 2004, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/alevels2004/story/0,14505,1286448,00.html 276 Ibid. 277 Tony Halpin, “Students will face 4,000-word super essay at A level”, The Times, 19 August 2004, pp. 1-2. 278 Ibid.


63

courses are overloaded and rushed, without the added stress of an extended essay.

Physics is difficult in both reality and perception279. SHAP gets the message across in

an entertaining, relevant way that both the pupils and teachers enjoy. Both find it hard

work, but both find it rewarding. Yes there are glitches, but I think the sugar-coating

Salters Horners has given physics is a step in the right direction, sparking interest and

infectious enthusiasm. It would be a shame if next month’s report meant an end to this

innovative approach to physics.

279 M.B. Ormerod, “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys”, p. 103.


64

Bibliography

Advancing Physics, at

http://advancingphysics.iop.org/products/index.html

Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), “Physics A”, at

http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gceasa/phyA.html and “Physics B” at

http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gceasa/phyB.html

Astin, Christina; Fisher, Nick and Taylor, Bernard, “Finding physics in the real world:

how to teach physics effectively with visits”, Physics Education, January 2002,

Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 18-24.

Athena Project, at http://www.etechb.co.uk/athena

BBC.co.uk, “New science lessons for young citizens”, BBC.co.uk, 9 January 2003, at

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2642745.stm

BBC.co.uk, “Science lessons ‘tedious and dull’”, BBC.co.uk, 11 July 2002, at


BBC.co.uk, “Science pupils want more ideas”, BBC.co.uk, 24 November 2003, at


Bell, Beverley, “The role of schools in providing a background knowledge of science”,

Communicating Science to the Public, (Sussex: Ciba Foundation, 1987), pp. 49-

63.

Cajas, Fernando, “Using out-of-school experiences in science lessons: an impossible

task”, International Journal of Science Education, 1998, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp.

623-625.

Campbell, Bob; Hogarth, Sylvia and Lubben, Fred, “Contextualising the Physics


65

Curriculum: Learners’ Perceptions of Interest and Helpfulness”, a paper

presented at the BERA Annual Conference, Cardiff, September 2000. Available

from Bob Campbell, [email protected]

Campbell, Bob; Lubben, Fred and Dlamini, Zelda, “Learning science through contexts:

helping pupils make sense of everyday situations”, International Journal of

Science Education, 2000, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 239-252.

Campbell, Bob; Hogarth, Sylvia and Lubben, Fred, “Students’ ideas about interesting

contexts in SHAP books I and II – An Interim Research Report”, Department of

Education Studies, University of York, December 1999. Available from Bob

Campbell, [email protected]

Clare, John, Education Editor, “A-levels have become easier, schools minister admits”,

The Telegraph, 18 August 2004, at

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/18/nexam18.x

ml

Cantor, Geoffrey, “Teaching Philosophy and HPS to Science Students”, PRS-LTSN

Journal, Summer 2001, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14-24.

Centre for British Teachers (CfBT), at http://www.cfbt.com

Cohen, Louis and Manion, Lawrence, “Chapter 13: The Interview”, Research Methods

in Education, (London: Croom Helm Ltd, 1980), pp. 241-262.

Council for the Curriculum Examinations and Assessment (CCEA), at

http://www.ccea.org.uk/

Curriculum 2000, “Curriculum 2000: Implementation Progress Report”, Curriculum

2000, July 2000, at

http://lsc.wwt.co.uk/documents/othercouncilpublications/other_pdf/curr2k.pdf


66

Curtis, Polly, “Dissertation could determine university offers”,

EducationGuardian.co.uk, 19 August 2004, at

http://education.guardian.co.uk/alevels2004/story/0,14505,1286448,00.html

Curtis, Polly, “Science in schools fails to inspire”, EducationGuardian.co.uk, 11 July

2002, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,753392,00.html

Department of Education and Skills, “The Standards Site: Specialist Schools” at

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/specialistschools/

Edexcel, “Physics”, at

http://www.edexcel.org.uk/qualifications/QualificationSubject.aspx?id=48952

Edexcel, “Statistics for Edexcel’s recent GCE examinations”, at

http://www.edexcel.org.uk/sfc/ServicesEditorial.aspx?id=59451

Edexcel, UA013911 – Examiner Report – Edexcel AS/A GCE Physics (Salters Horners)

– Summer 2003, (London: London Qualifications Ltd, June 2003), PDF from

http://www.edexcel.org.uk/qualifications/QualificationAward.aspx?id=48965.

Edexcel, UA006822 – Specification – Edexcel AS/A GCE Physics (Salters Horners) –

Issue 3, (London: London Qualifications Ltd, October 2003), PDF from

http://www.edexcel.org.uk/qualifications/QualificationAward.aspx?id=48965.

Elise, Mark and Osbourne, Jonathan, “Should physics be more elitist?”, PhysicsWeb,

January 2004, at http://physicsweb.org/article/world/17/1/7

Evening Standard, “A-level Results”, Evening Standard, 19 August 2004, p. 17.

Gaskell, P. James, “Authentic science and school science”, International Journal of

Science Education, 1992, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 265-272.

Gillibrand, Eileen; Robinson, Peter; Brawn, Richard and Osborn, Albert, “Girls’


67

participation in physics in single sex classes in mixed schools in relation to

confidence and achievement”, International Journal of Science Education, 1999,

Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 349-362.

The Guardian, “The Tomlinson report: The key points”, The Guardian, 3 December

2002, at http://education.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4559738-110914,00.html

Halpin, Tony, “Students will face 4,000-word super essay at A-level”, The Times, 19

August 2004, pp. 1-2.

Harding, Jan, “Sex differences in science examinations”, The Missing Half: Girls and

Science Education, Alison Kelly (ed.), (Manchester: Manchester University

Press, 1981), p. 192-204.

Haste, Helen, “Nestle Social Research Programme. Science in My Future: a study of

values and beliefs in rela tion to science and technology amongst 11-21 year

olds”, at http://www.spreckley.co.uk/nestle/science- in-my-future-full.pdf

Havard, Neil, “Student attitudes to studying A-level sciences”, Public Understanding

of Science, 1996, Vol. 5, pp. 321-330.

Hicks, Bill, “Forces at work”, Times Education Supplement Teacher Magazine, 4 April

2003, at

http://www.tes.co.uk/search/search_display.asp?section=Archive&sub_section=

TES+Teacher&id=378003&Type=0

Higham, Jeremy, “GCE A Levels in the school curriculum”, Post-14 Research Group,

School of Education, University of Leeds, 1997, at

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002217.htm

Hilpern, Kate, “Life, the universe and everything”, The Independent, Physicist, a


68

special supplement produced in association with Institute of Physics, 9 October

2003, p. 3.

Hilton, Anthony, “Essays from past prove standards have never been higher”, Evening

Standard, 19 August 2004, pp. 16-17.

Hofstadter, Douglas R., “Popular Culture and the Threat to Rational Inquiry”,

Science, 24 July 1998, Vol 281, No. 5376, pp. 512-513, available at

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/281/5376/512

Holt, John, How Children Fail, (London: Penguin, 1964).

Howes, Elaine V., Connecting Girls with Science: Constructivism, Feminism, and

Science Education Reform, (New York: Teachers College Press, 2002).

Hunt and Russell (eds), Nuffield Science in Practice. GNVQ Science: Your questions

answered, (London: Heinemann, 1994).

Institute of Physics (IOP) at, http://www.iop.org

Institute of Physics, “8.7 Physics Statistics 1: GCSE and A-level”, Institute of Physics,

Oct 1999, at http://policy.iop.org/Policy/8.7.doc

Institute of Physics, “Institute of Physics response to A Level results”, Institute of

Physics, August 2003, at http://www.iop.org/news/605

Institute of Physics, “Phys ics Policy: Statistics of Physics”, Institute of Physics, at

http://policy.iop.org/Policy/Statistics/#post16

Institute of Physics, “Press Release: The number of girls taking AS and A level physics

continues to fall”, Institute of Physics, 14 August 2003, at

http://physics.iop.org/IOP/Press/PR6103.html

Jamieson, Valerie, “Learning lessons from the classroom”, PhysicsWeb, March 2002, at

http://physicsweb.org/article/world/15/3/9/1


69

Joint Council of General Qualifications (JCGQ), “Examination Results (2001-2004)”, at

http://www.jcgq.org.uk/results.asp

Kelly, Alison, “Retrieving the missing half”, The Missing Half: Girls and Science

Education, Alison Kelly (ed.), (Manchester: Manchester University Press,

1981), pp. 276-297.

Kelly, Alison, “Introduction” pp. 1-10 and “Why girls don’t do science” pp. 12-17,

Science for Girls?, Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open

University Press, 1987).

King, Julia, “Young physicists being turned off”, The Guardian, 18 December 2003, at

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1109171,00.html

Lawson, Joanne, “Sowing the seeds of discontent”, EducationGuardian.co.uk,

19 August 2004, at


Lubben, Fred; Campbell, Bob and Hogarth, Sylvia, “Assessment through reports of

‘physics- in-action’ visits”, School Science Review, June 2001, Vol. 82, No. 301,

pp. 47-53.

Lubben, Fred; Campbell, Bob and Dlamini, Betty, “Contextualizing science teaching in

Swaziland: some student reactions”, International Journal of Science Education,

1996, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 311-320.

Lubben, Fred and Campbell, Bob, “Learners’ views of context-led physics curriculum

materials”, A paper presented for the ESERA Conference, Thessaloniki, August

2001. This paper reports Work in Progress. Not to be quoted without permission

from Fred Lubben, [email protected]

Macfarlane, E, “Double award GCSE balanced science: its contribution to A-level


70

success”, Physics Education, 1993, Vol. 28, pp. 362-365.

MacLeod, Donald, “The facts about A-levels”, The Guardian, 18 September 2002, at

http://education.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4503606-110914,00.html

Mayoh, Kathyrn and Knutton, Stephen, “Using out-of-school experience in science

lessons: reality or rhe toric?”, International Journal of Science Education, 1997,

Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 849-867.

McInerney, John, “How to survive the 21st century”, PhysicsWeb, July 2000, at

http://physicsweb.org/article/world/13/7/2

Mellor, Felicity, “Gender and the communication of physics through multimedia”,

Public Understanding of Science, 2001, Volume 10, pp. 271-291.

Miles, Tim and Sims, Paul, “Boys work out a way to narrow gender gap”, Evening

Standard, 19 August 2004, p. 16.

Millar, Robin and Osborne, Jonathan (eds), Beyond 2000: Science education for the

future, (London: King’s College, 1998).

Millar, Robin; Osborne, Jonathan and Nott, Mick, “Science Education for the future”,

School Science Review, December 1998, Vol. 80, No. 291, pp. 19-24.

Mills, Pauline, “Never mind content, look at how physics is taught”, Times Education

Supplement, 20 June 1997, at


Friday&id=55830&Type=0

Neumark, Victoria, “Physics needs maths”, Times Educational Supplement, 1 January

1999, at


News+%26+opinion&id=82404&Type=0


71

Ogborn, Jon, “New hope for physics education”, Physicsweb, October 1999, at


Ormerod, M.B., “Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices

and attitudes of girls and boys”, The Missing Half: Girls and Science Education,

Alison Kelly (ed.), (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1981), pp. 100-

112.

Osborne, Jonathan and Collins, Sue, “Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science

curriculum”, School Science Review, September 2000, Vol. 82, No. 298, pp. 23-

31.

Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations (OCR), “AS/A Level GCE and Subject

Family: Sciences”, at

http://www.ocr.org.uk/OCR/WebSite/docroot/qualifications/qualificationFinder.

do?qualificationTypeOID=1954&subjectFamilyOID=1998&x=54&y=44

Parker, Becky, “Fresh approach to A-level physics”, Times Educational Supplement, 5

September 2003, at


TES+Teacher&id=383375&Type=0

Parker, Becky, “The A-team”, Times Educational Supplement, 8 September 2000, at


Curriculum+specials&id=338234&Type=0

Parker, Kerry; Swinbank, Elizabeth and Taylor, Bernard, “Piloting Salters Horners

Advancing Physics”, Physics Education, May 2000, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 209-

212.

Parry, Vivienne, “Don’t mention the S-word”, The Guardian, 2 September 2004, at


72

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,,1294932,00.html

PhysicsWeb, “How good is physics in the UK?”, PhysicsWeb, June 2000, at


PhysicsWeb, “Physics needs women”, PhysicsWeb, March 2002, at


PhysicsWeb, “The classroom needs you”, PhysicsWeb, October 1999, at


Powell, Kendall, “Spare me the lecture”, Nature, 18 September 2003, Vol. 425, pp. 234-

236.

Pyke, Nicholas and Blackburne, Linda, “A-level with 2,000 desserters”, Times

Education Supplement, 10 January 1997, at



Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), “Physics”, at

http://www.qca.org.uk/ages14-19/subjects/physics.html

Raat, Jan H. and de Vries, Marc, “Technology in education: Research and development

in the project ‘Physics and Technology’”, International Journal of Science

Education, 1987, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 159-168.

Radford, Tim, “Royal Society warns on science education”, The Guardian, 18 Dec

2003, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1109360,00.html

Ramsden, Judith M, “If it’s enjoyable, is it science?”, School Science Review, June

1992, Vol. 73, No. 265, pp. 65-71.

Ridley, Brian, “Are physicists useful?”, PhysicsWeb, December 2001, at



73

Rodgers, Peter, “New dimensions in education”, Physicsweb, January 2004, at


Royal Society, “Media Release: Government must reverse “disturbing” A-level science

trends”, Royal Society, 17 May 2004, at

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/templates/press/releasedetails.cfm?file=533.txt

Royal Society, “Media Release: Royal Society Athena Awards recognise gender and

equality work”, Royal Society, 18 March 2004, at


Royal Society, “Media Release: Urgent Action needed to tackle crisis in science

education. Statement by Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the Royal Society

Education Committee”, Royal Society, 17 December 2003, at


Russell, Nick, “Unit 8: The basis of public knowledge. Children learning and children

learning science”, MSc Science Communication, Core Module 2: Spreading the

word. The history of communication in science and society, (London: Imperial

College, unpublished, 2003).

Salters Horners Advanced Physics (SHAP), at

http://www.horners.org.uk/pages/Education/shap.html

Salters Horners Advanced Physics (SHAP), at

http://www.york.ac.uk/org/seg/salters/physics/

Salters Horners Advanced Physics AS Level Student Book, (Oxford: Heinemann

Educational Publishers and York: University of York Science Education Group,

2000).

Sciencewise, at http://www.sciencewise.org.uk


74

Sears, John, “GCSE balanced science: A-level uptake and student attitudes”, Physics

Education, 1993, Vol. 28, pp. 366-370.

Smail, Barbara, “Organizing the curriculum to fit girls’ interests” pp. 80-88 and

“Encouraging girls to give physics a second chance” pp. 113-118, Science for

Girls?, Alison Kelly (ed.), (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press,

1987).

Solbes, J. and Vilches, A., “STS Interactions in the Teaching of Physics and

Chemistry”, Science Education, July 1997, Vol. 81, No. 4, pp. 377-386.

Swinbank, Elizabeth, “Changes in A-level Physics: some background”, Institute of

Physics, at http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0031-9120/36/4/601#abs_toc_12

Swinbank, Elizabeth, “Good enough to eat”, Physics Education, January 2004, Vol. 39,

No. 1, pp. 52-57.

Swinbank, Elizabeth, “Results from the SHAP pilot: successful and girl- friendly”,

Institute of Physics, at

http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0031-9120/36/4/601#abs_toc_12

Teachernet, “Curriculum 2000 and support for Curriculum Managers”, Teachernet,

website accessed 14 August 2004, date written not given, at

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/supplyteachers/detail.cfm?&vid=5&cid=18&sid=

119&ssid=5010701&opt=0

TES editorial, “Science time bomb ticks on”, Times Education Supplement, 3 January

1997, at



Tomlinson, Mike, Inquiry into A level Standards (London: Inquiry into A level


75

Standards, December 2002).

University of York Science Education Group (UYSEG), at

http://www.uyseg.org/home_menu.htm

Ward, Lucy, “Media studies up, sciences down”, The Guardian, 19 August 2004, at


Welsh Joint Education Committee (WJEC), “General Certificate of Education –

Physics”, at http://www.wjec.co.uk/physics.html

Woolnough, Brian E., “Why students choose physics, or reject it”, Physics Education,

1994, Vol. 29, pp. 368-374.


76

Acknowledgements

Felicity Mellor for her help, support and advice

The teachers and Year 12 pupils for their time and help and for letting me disrupt

classes with my interviews and questionnaires

Steve Jones from Centre for British Teachers (CfBT) for the invaluable crash course in

science education and for fantastic help, advice and contacts

Elizabeth Swinbank at the Department of Educational Studies, University of York,

for her approachable, helpful attitude, and the wealth of information she

provided concerning the Salters Horners course

Mark Orrow-Whiting at Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) for helpful

advice and information concerning exam boards, syllabus schemes and statistics

Ian Cuthbert at the Institute of Physics, for helpful discussions and educational

resources, and for inviting me to join an IOP education advisory group.

Fred Lubben, Bob Campbell, Sylvia Hogarth and Judith M Bennett at the

Department of Educational Studies, University of York, for their help, papers

and resources

Jiffty Chug at Barnet Local Education Authority for her help with contacts and schools

Nick Fay for helpful discussions concerning teaching and the wider context of A-levels

James Bradshaw for providing the Year 12 perspective

Sarah Bradshaw and Richard Burr for late-night sugar-coated discussions

Frances Bradshaw for support, advice and information about teaching practices

Alan Bradshaw for emotional and financial support

My friends and Dorling Kindersley workmates for their support and humour

sugar-coated physics - bonhoeffercollege...

Documents