The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Assessment of Achievement Programme: Report of the Sixth AAP Survey of Science (2003)

5. Pupils' views about their learning, and informed attitudes

5.1 The pupil questionnaire

Pupils in the schools that participated in the practical science assessments were invited to complete a questionnaire about their home and school learning circumstances and experiences (the questionnaire is reproduced in Appendix C), and the opportunity was taken on this occasion to include in the questionnaire an exploration of pupils' informed attitudes in science, to be complemented by a series of focus group discussions.

After inviting demographic details (gender, date of birth, first and second languages) the questionnaire began by exploring the facilities and resources the pupils had available to them at home, for study and for homework, and the time they spent on homework in a normal week. A second set of questions - 11 in total - looked into the amount of time the pupils spent in various activities in the company of the adults in their lives (parents, carers, other family members): talking about hobbies, news, school work, books, films or TV programmes, reading, watching TV or videos, going to the cinema, listening to music, playing sport, etc.

The questionnaire then moved on to probe the pupils' opinions about their school learning experiences in science. Among other aspects, the 30 questions in this section focused on the style of teaching/learning in the classroom, on the nature of subject assessment and the feedback given, on the pupil's personal topic interests and general attitude to the subject, on the pupil's level of self-confidence, and on the pupil's evaluation of the behaviour of the class. A fourth set of questions - 18 in total - asked pupils to rate how often they engaged in various different kinds of activities in their subject lessons: working with a partner on a shared task, completing worksheets, handling objects and artefacts, visiting places outside school, etc.

A final set of questions explored pupils' attitudes to topical issues in science and technology. Modelled on an earlier enquiry in the Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) Science survey of 1984 ¹⁰, which took place at age 15 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the questionnaire presented pupils with up to four topical issues in science and technology, and invited them to indicate whether they had heard of the issue concerned, whether it interested them, whether they thought it good or bad for society, and why. It is in responses to the "why?" that evidence of informed attitudes was sought.

The complementary discussion groups were animated and managed in the schools by the field officers who also undertook the assessments of pupils' science investigation skills (see Chapter 3) and ICT skills (see Chapter 4). Each group was given an issue to discuss, stimulated by information provided by the field officers.

The results of these various enquiries are fascinating, particularly those relating to pupils' informed attitudes. But readers should note that while the numbers of pupils who completed the questionnaires were relatively large - just under 500 at P5, over 400 at P7 and over 300 at S2 - these pupils were drawn from rather few schools. Of the 80 'practical' schools at P5, just 47 returned pupil questionnaires, giving a response rate of 59%; of the 83 practical schools at P7, 40 participated in the pupil questionnaire study (48%); while at S2, just 30 of the 86 practical schools complied with the invitation to cooperate in this particular exercise (35% response). Despite this, the resulting pupil profiles match closely those of the pupils who responded to a similar questionnaire in the Social Subjects survey one year earlier, in terms of demographic characteristics and home support for learning (described in section 5.2). This would suggest that the questionnaire data do have value, and merit consideration.

5.2 The pupils

5.2.1 Gender, language, hobbies and job aspirations

All three stage samples were evenly divided by gender, and on average 87% of the pupils claimed that English was their first language with 4% indicating 'Scottish' (fewer than 1% mentioned other languages, including French and German). On average, 17% of the pupils agreed that they had a second language, the majority among these mentioning French. Only 6% on average named a third language, and again for the majority among this small proportion this language was French. Other less prevalent languages were numerous: Irish, Welsh, Portuguese, Italian, Chinese, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Swahili, Urdu, Punjabi, among others.

Three-quarters of the pupils were members of at least one club or other activity-based organisation, the proportion falling from over 80% at P5 through around 75% at P7 to just under 60% at S2. Around half the pupils belonged to sports clubs of various sorts, decreasing from around 60% at P5 through just under 50% at P7 to 35% at S2. Around a quarter were cubs, brownies, scouts or guides, or members of youth clubs or after school clubs, again the proportion decreasing with age, from around 30% at P5 through 25% at P7 to just over 15% at S2. Around 20% of the pupils belonged to drama societies, attended dance classes, were taking music lessons, or were members of choirs or pipe bands. Here, the proportions at P5 and P7 were roughly the same at around 25%, falling to just under 15% at S2. Finally, a very small proportion of the pupils, at under 5%, engaged in other kinds of pursuits, belonging to computer clubs, chess clubs, science clubs, library groups, and so on. At all stages sports activities were significantly more popular among the boys than the girls with the reverse holding for the performing arts.

Preferred jobs on leaving school mirrored the picture that emerged in the earlier Social Subjects survey. Four out of five pupils mentioned at least one occupation, and the resulting range of jobs was extremely wide. Among all of the possibilities, the most frequently mentioned jobs were footballer (10% of the pupils, decreasing with age from 15% at P5 to 4% at S2), teacher (7%), vet (6%), entertainer (actor, singer or dancer, with 5% mentions in total), lawyer (4%) and hairdresser (4%). Other jobs with more than 1% of mentions included accountant, architect, the army, beautician, chef, 'something in computers', doctor, engineer, fire fighter, interior or graphic designer, joiner, mechanic, nurse, pilot, police, writer.

The evidence from this repeat enquiry confirms once again that jobs remain very heavily gender typed in the eyes of young people. A mere handful of girls aspired to become football players or pilots, and none mentioned 'mechanic', 'joiner' or 'engineer'; in contrast, most of the pupils aspiring to become teachers or vets were girls, and among the boys it was even rarer to find 'hairdresser', 'nurse' or 'dancer' mentioned.

Of particular relevance here is the fact that science-relevant occupations were mentioned by around 15% of the pupils, rising from around 10% at P5 to 20% at S2. Thus, in addition to the relatively frequently mentioned vet, doctor, nurse, mechanic and engineer we can include rare references to biologist, marine biologist, botanist, zoologist, pharmacist, forensic scientist and physicist, among others.

5.2.2 Home resources for learning

As well as traditional resources, such as dictionary, atlas and calculator, pupils were asked whether they had access to a computer and the internet, and whether they had a mobile phone and access to a television and video recorder in the home. They were also asked if they had a quiet place to study at home. Access rates are given in Table 5.1.

High proportions of the pupils in all three stages had use of a quiet place to study at home, along with access to a dictionary and calculator (75-80% for each resource). And while access to a computer and the internet was lower at P5 than at P7, and lower at P7 than at S2, the majority of pupils at all stages had access to these potential learning resources (70-80% for a computer; 55-70% for the internet). The learning resource which the fewest pupils had access to was an atlas (50-60%).

Table 5.1 Home resources

(% pupils with access)

Some pupils had access to all the resources, the proportions increasing with age: 33% at S2, 25% at P7, 17% at P5. There were no gender differences at any stage in terms of access to any of the resources at home.

5.2.3 Home support for learning

Pupils were asked how often they engaged in different activities with adults in their families. Table 5.2 presents the findings. The picture that emerged was fairly uniform across stages, and Table 5.2 therefore shows averages over the three stages (detailed stage by stage data are provided in Table D.1 in Appendix D).

Before reviewing the results of this enquiry, it should be noted that some of the activities featured could take many forms, some more educational than others, and some more relevant than others in terms of pupils' scientific development. For example, 'Talking about what you do in your spare time' might be talking about a science-relevant hobby, or it could be talking about football or horse riding. 'Talking about things that have happened in the news' could include talking about current affairs, breakthroughs in science, or the latest pop gossip. 'Outings or visits to interesting places or events' could embrace visits to Hampden Park as well as visits to nature reserves, water purification plants or distilleries. In other words, we cannot necessarily equate high levels of family involvement in the various activities with high levels of direct learning support from parents, carers or other adult family members, particularly in science. But we can reasonably assume that high levels of family involvement reflect or stimulate high levels of interest in the pupil, and therefore in the pupil's general self-development, including educational development.

Table 5.2 Activities with family adults

(% pupils giving each frequency)

According to the pupils, the activities most frequently shared with adult family members were 'watching TV and videos' and 'listening to music' (59% and 57%, respectively, of the pupils claimed to do these on 'most days'. Talking about free time activities and talking about school work and progress were also popular, with 46% and 51%, respectively, of the pupils claiming to engage in these activities with adult family members on most days. Reading or talking about books were much less popular activities, with around one-third of the pupils responding 'hardly ever' to this option, and with evidence of decreasing popularity with increasing age.

There were some marked gender differences at all stages in terms of the types of family activity that the pupils claimed to engage in frequently. For instance, proportionally more girls than boys claimed to spend 'most days' talking with their family members about what they did in their spare time (49% versus 43%, averaged over stages), talking about school work and progress (57% versus 45%), reading or talking about books (27% versus 19%) and listening to music (61% versus 52%), whereas proportionally more boys than girls claimed to spend 'most days' with other family members 'playing sport or games or keeping fit' (59% versus 44%).

5.3 Predominant activities in science lessons

As far as their school experience of science is concerned, pupils were asked to indicate how often they engaged in various activities in their science lessons. Table 5.3 presents the resulting findings, averaged over stages, while stage by stage results are given in Table D.2 in Appendix D.

As Table 5.3 shows, whole class teaching predominated in the pupils' science lessons, with just under 80% of the pupils claiming they experienced this in most lessons, with no differences across the stages. High proportions of pupils also spent most lessons completing worksheets and writing in their jotters or files. This picture mirrors that reported for pupils' perceptions of social subjects lessons, as reported in the 2002 survey.

Table 5.3 Activities within science lessons

(% pupils giving each frequency: 1270 pupils - 498 P5, 436 P7, 336 S2)

According to their responses, the S2 pupils worked significantly more often with a partner than did their younger peers (50% checked 'most lessons', compared with just over 30% at each primary stage), used tools and instruments more often 'to investigate things' (just under 40% checked 'most lessons', compared with just under 25% at each primary stage), and more frequently wrote in their jotters and files (86% checked 'most lessons', compared with 65-70% for P5 and P7). As to handling objects and artefacts, 60-70% of the pupils at each stage agreed that they did this in most science lessons or at least in most weeks.

The evidence from the two subject surveys is that, as might be expected, tools and instruments, along with objects and artefacts, featured more frequently in science in school than in social subjects. On the other hand, while working quietly alone, reading texts or reference books, and watching video or audio tapes were quite frequent activities in science lessons (70-80% of the pupils claiming they did the first two in 'most lessons' or 'most weeks', with 45-55% claiming the same for media use), all three activities were even more frequent in social subjects classrooms (corresponding proportions 80-90% for the first two activities and 55-70% for the third), according to the pupils in the two subject surveys.

Working with a computer, alone or with a partner, was not a regular part of science learning, according to the pupils' responses (over 60% claiming to do this only 'each term' or 'rarely'), and computer use decreased with increasing age. Indeed, the 2002 Social Subjects survey findings would suggest that computers are more frequently used in the social subjects curriculum than in science, at least at P7. Talking individually with the teacher and working in a small group were not particularly frequent activities either (just 40-50% on average agreed that they did this in most lessons or most weeks); there was no evidence of any subject difference here. Working in the school grounds and visiting places outside school were among the least frequent activities engaged in, with frequency decreasing with increasing age, and no evidence of subject differences.

There was no evidence of any gender difference in the reporting data.

5.4 Homework

The questionnaire included two statements relating to homework - 'We get regular homework in science' and 'I use a computer to do my science homework' - and also invited pupils to indicate how much time they spent on homework each week.

Science homework featured far more prominently in the experience of the S2 pupils compared with the primary pupils. Well over half the S2 pupils (56%) claimed that they 'always' or 'mostly' received regular science homework, compared with around 15% of the pupils at P5 and P7. But there was little difference in the amount of computer use across the stages: 20-25% of the pupils claimed that they 'always' or 'mostly' used a computer when doing their science homework.

As with any information based on retrospective estimation, the pupils' responses about the time they typically spent on their science homework can only be considered as very loosely indicative. That said, the S2 pupils claimed to spend significantly more time on average on homework than did the P7 or P5 pupils: on average, just under 31/2 hours at S2 compared with just under 21/2 hours at P7 and 2 hours at P5. Most typically, P5 pupils claimed to spend 11/2 hours on science homework per week compared with 11/2 or 21/2 hours at P7 and S2 (modal values). These timings are roughly in line with those reported by pupils in the earlier survey for social subjects homework.

There were no gender differences in any respect at any stage.

5.5 Perceptions about classroom learning experience

Pupils were invited to rate each of a set of given statements for perceived applicability to their science lessons, in an exploration into views about classroom learning experience. For example, pupils were to indicate the degree to which the statement "We learn a lot of facts in science" applied to their science learning. Opinions were noted by checking one of the following response options: "Yes, always", "Mostly", "Not usually" and "Definitely not", with "Don't know" also a possibility.

The list of statements focused on a variety of issues, including the style of teaching/learning, the nature of assessment, the pupil's interest in the subject, the pupil's level of self-confidence, and so on. For ease of presentation the statements are here loosely grouped into those that relate to 'The nature of teaching and learning', 'Motivation to learn' and 'Assessment and feedback', and findings are given for the pupil sample as whole, with any marked stage or gender differences noted (detailed results broken down by stage are given in Tables D.3, D.4 and D.5 in Appendix D).

5.5.1 The nature of teaching and learning

In Table 5.4 (and Table D.3 in Appendix D) we see a mixture of different statements, some relating to the nature of subject learning, others to the style of subject teaching, and yet others to issues of classroom climate (e.g. discipline). As we can see, most pupils thought that they were expected to work hard in their science lessons (95% responding 'yes, always' or 'mostly'), that they were encouraged to say what they thought (88%) and that they were given help when they needed it (83%).

Table 5.4 Statements bearing on the nature of teaching and learning

(% pupils giving each response: 1270 pupils - 498 P5, 436 P7, 336 S2)

Interestingly, on pupil evidence, science lessons are as fact-based as social subjects lessons in the primary and lower secondary school: around 90% of the P7 and S2 pupils in both surveys claimed that they 'always' or 'mostly' learned 'a lot facts' in their lessons (P5 was not assessed in the social subjects survey). On the other hand, science lessons were rated more highly than social subjects lessons for the statement that learning is about asking 'Why?' and 'What if?', with 70% of the P7 and S2 pupils here claiming that their learning in science was 'always' or 'mostly' about asking 'Why?' and 'What if?' compared with a lower 60% with respect to social subjects lessons in the 2002 survey. There were no gender differences evident in the data in either survey.

5.5.2 Motivation to learn

A number of statements bore upon aspects of pupils' motivation to learn. Some of these focused on intrinsic motivation, e.g. the degree to which pupils found topics and investigations interesting, and others on extrinsic motivation, in particular own and family perceptions about the value of science for later learning and for jobs.

The results of this enquiry are shown averaged over stages in Table 5.5, and by stage in Table D.4 in Appendix D. Over 90% of the pupils claimed that they 'always' or 'mostly' wanted to do well in science (65-85% of the pupils at each stage wanted to do well 'always'), and worked hard on their topics and investigations. In addition, over 80% of the pupils thought that they 'mostly' or 'always' discussed interesting topics and ideas in their subject lessons and that they were given interesting topics and investigations to do.

Table 5.5 Statements bearing on pupils' motivation to learn

(% pupils giving each response: 1270 pupils - 498 P5, 436 P7, 336 S2)

Fewer pupils were equally positive about how much they looked forward to their science lessons (around 60%) and how much they enjoyed reading books about the subject (around half). A familiar finding is decreasing enthusiasm for lessons with increasing age: proportionally more of the P5 pupils than the P7 pupils and proportionally more of the P7 pupils than the S2 pupils, looked forward to their science lessons, thought that they had interesting topics and investigations to do and that they discussed interesting ideas and topics in these lessons, and enjoyed reading books about science (see Table D.3 in Appendix D). Another unsurprising difference emerged between the primary pupils on the one hand and the secondary pupils on the other, with regard to the statement 'pupils settle down quickly at the start of lessons' - the primary pupils being more positive about this than the S2 pupils.

The primary pupils were also more positive than the S2 pupils in their perceptions of the value of science for later subject learning: over 95% of the primary pupils thought that science learning 'is important because it will help with other subjects later on', compared with just over 80% of the S2 pupils. Perceptions about the importance of science learning for future earning power ('good jobs') were much more even.

Once again the P7 pupils in the science survey tended to be more positive in general in their views about science learning than those involved in the 2002 survey with respect to social subjects learning. At S2, the one issue that showed significant differences in opinion between science and social subjects concerned perceived subject importance: while just over 60% of the S2 pupils in the 2002 survey agreed that social subjects learning is 'always' or 'mostly' important because it helps with other subject learning later on, and around half thought the same with respect to finding good jobs, over 80% of the S2 pupils in this science survey felt the same way, on both counts, about science learning.

Again, there were no gender differences evident in the data, in either survey.

5.5.3 Assessment and feedback

The findings for the statements that relate to "Assessment and feedback" are presented in Table 5.6, and also, broken down by stage, in Table D.5 in Appendix D.

Table 5.6 Statements relating to teacher and self assessment

(% pupils giving each response: 1270 pupils - 498 P5, 436 P7, 336 S2)

High proportions of pupils at all stages claimed that they typically found this subject easy to understand, disagreed that they went through the work too slowly or that they fell behind with their work, and just under half also agreed that it was not usually difficult to catch up if they missed a lesson.

Around 90% of the pupils agreed that when teachers corrected their work the corrections 'always' or 'mostly' showed them where they had gone wrong, while around three-quarters also agreed that they were shown by their teachers how to improve their work. The P5 pupils were on the whole more positive than those at P5 and S2 about these aspects (see Table D.5 in Appendix D). In contrast, lower proportions of the pupils at all stages, 40-45%, agreed that they were 'always' or 'mostly' involved in planning next steps in their learning.

The S2 pupils claimed in significantly higher proportions than their younger peers (over 90% compared with under 50%) that they received information about their progress 'always' or 'mostly' in the form of levels, grades and test scores: over half the S2 pupils responded 'always' to this statement. S2 pupils also tended more often than those in the primary stages to be assessed with short tests (74% responding 'always' or 'mostly' compared with around 50% at each primary stage).

There were no gender differences evident in the pupils' reported perceptions, and neither were there any differences between science and social subjects.

5.6 Informed attitudes

5.6.1 Attitudes towards topical issues in science and technology

Pupils' familiarity with and attitudes towards a number of socially important issues in or applications of science, medicine and technology were explored through the pupil questionnaire: nuclear power, global warming, space exploration, the internet, designer babies, cancer research cosmetic surgery, organ donation, robotics, weapons of mass destruction, genetically modified foods, and DNA. To reduce the questionnaire burden on pupils, the issues were randomly distributed across alternative versions of what was in other respects the same questionnaire, so that any one pupil gave reactions to between two and four topical issues only. In addition, at P5 just four topics in total were included in the enquiry, compared with nine at P7 and S2.

Pupils were asked whether they had heard of the issue in question, whether it interested them, whether they thought it good or bad for society ('unsure' was allowed), and why they thought this. Table 5.7 shows the proportions of pupils at the various stages who claimed to be aware of the issue in question.

Table 5.7 Awareness of topical issues in science and technology

(% pupils claiming to 'have heard of' the issue in question)

The internet, cancer research and weapons of mass destruction, at least as terms, were familiar to almost all the pupils at the stages questioned, 90-100% of the pupils claiming to have heard of these. Global warming, cosmetic surgery and organ donation were also familiar terms to most S2 pupils (90% or more, with the same level of familiarity for 'DNA'), but all three were less familiar to P7 pupils (70-75% claimed to have heard of each of them). The least familiar terms/issues to the pupils were genetically modified foods and designer babies. There were no notable gender differences in issue familiarity.

As far as pupils' interests are concerned, Figure 5.1 illustrates the picture for those pupils who claimed to have heard of the issue in question.

Figure 5.1 Pupils' level of interest in the issues

(% pupils indicating interest among those who claimed to have heard of the issue in question)

The evidence is that, among all the issues explored, the internet is the one that most interested the majority of pupils at every stage; among the high proportions of pupils who claimed to be familiar with the term, around 80% were interested in the topic. Next in interest value were cancer research and weapons of mass destruction: 60% or more of the S2 pupils who had heard of these were interested in them, compared with 60% at P7 for cancer research and a lower 40% or thereabouts for weapons of mass destruction. The issues that proved of least interest to pupils were designer babies, cosmetic surgery and genetically modified foods. Indeed, 50-60% of the pupils at P7 and S2 claimed to be 'definitely not' interested in these particular issues. Some gender differences in topic interests could have been anticipated, and indeed these emerged. Proportionally more boys than girls claimed to be interested in nuclear power, space exploration, robotics and weapons of mass destruction, with proportionally more girls than boys claiming interest in cancer research, designer babies and cosmetic surgery.

As to the perceived value of each topic/issue to society, Figure 5.2 shows clearly that, in the eyes of the majority of the pupils, 'good' issues included the internet, cancer research, organ donation and, for the P7 pupils, the only stage asked about this particular topic, robotics: 60% or more of the pupils, rising to 80%+ for cancer research, responded 'good for society' in these cases. Weapons of mass destruction, on the other hand, were considered definitely 'bad for society' by 80% or more of the pupils, and global warming was considered a bad thing by around 60% of the pupils at P7 and S2, though only around 30% at P5. Designer babies, cosmetic surgery, genetically modified foods and nuclear power produced more mixed views, with relatively large proportions of pupils being unsure if these were good or bad, a small minority thinking they might be both.

Typically, 90% or more of the pupils who gave a definite opinion about whether a topic was good or bad for society also offered a reason for their views, compared with 55-65% of the pupils who were 'unsure'. Among those pupils who ventured to express a definite value judgment and who gave a reason for it, the majority gave valid justifications for their views (see Appendix E), showing evidence that their judgments were appropriately informed: over half at P5 for their four issues rising to around 80% at P7 and S2 for their nine issues. In particular, among the high proportions of pupils who considered cancer research, the internet and organ donation to be good things for society, over 90% gave 'informed' reasons. Similarly, among the high proportions of pupils who considered global warming and weapons of mass destruction to be bad things for society, again the majority gave valid reasons for their views (around 90% in both cases at P7 and S2, and 80% for global warming at P5).

The dominant positive feature of the internet was seen to be its value as a rich and efficient information source. The majority of comments referred to this aspect, as did these few illustrative examples: "It is a good thing because you can get information", "It gives you lots of information from all over the world", "Because it helps children's education", "It gives you information and helps you", "Because it helps you find information for homework", "Because it can help you, eg. projects for school". The entertainment value of the internet, and its potential for 2-way communication and online shopping, were features mentioned by a small minority of pupils, with comments such as "Because there are games for small children", "Because it's entertainment", "Because there are children's sites you can go on to learn and have fun", "They can sell and buy without moving", "Because people can log on and order shopping, contact other people and find out traffic news", "It helps with communication, as an information source and to buy things from home", "So people can chat to other people across the world and to find out things".

Those few pupils who considered the internet to be a bad thing generally referred to the dangers of paedophilia: "I think it is a bad thing because if you put your address on it, somebody may come and kill you", "Because people go on to the chat line and there are some bad people on the chat line and some bad things happen", "Because people can act 18 but be about 63", etc. This problem was mentioned also by some of the pupils who saw both the good and the bad, as in the following comments: "It is good for finding things but it is also dangerous because of chat rooms", "The internet is a good source for information, but some people go to chat rooms and meet other people who sometimes are bad people", "I think I'm not sure because some people spend too much time on the internet", "Cause there are paedophiles on the internet, but it can be useful", "Because you can get good things out of it, but it is also dangerous".

Figure 5.2 Pupils' opinions about the value of the topic/issue to society

(% pupils indicating given opinion among those who claimed to have heard of the topic/issue in question)

The majority of the pupils recognised that cancer research is aimed at finding treatments and cures for cancer, and that through it many lives can be saved. The following comments are typical: "Because cancer kills people", "It saves lives", "It will help find a cure for cancer", "It is good because it helps the people that have cancer", "So people can learn about cancer", "Because someone in my family has got cancer". No pupils considered cancer research a bad thing. Organ donation was also recognised by the majority of pupils as a means of saving life: "Because it keeps people alive", "It saves lives", "If someone is dying of a disease we can help them", "It helps keep people alive if they have organ failure", "Because it gives someone else a better chance in life. And the person's dead already". The three pupils who thought organ donation a bad thing and who offered an informed reason for this view gave the following comments: "Because the other person's organs could be another blood type", "Because the person who donated their organs might become ill", "Might be a dodgy organ".

The following few examples are illustrative of the numerous comments of pupils who considered weapons of mass destruction to be 'bad for society': "They kill you", "Anything called a weapon is made for the intention of hurting people, therefore they are wrong", "Because they cause so much destruction", "Because they destroy lives, towns, cities and even countries", "Weapons of mass destruction do exactly what it says in its title. They destruct large areas", "These are very dangerous and can cause a lot of damage to people".

The majority of the comments about global warming referred to the harmful influence on the environment, in particular damage to the ozone layer, and to the increased likelihood of serious flooding. The following comments are indicative: "I think so because it will eventually melt polar ice caps", "It is damaging the ozone layer", "Because if it keeps going the world will flood", "It harms the environment", "There will soon be nothing left of the world". Among the relatively few pupils who checked 'good for society' here, and who gave a reason for this view, several referred to the value of global warming literally as a source of warmth, suggesting a very impartial understanding of the problem: "It keeps you warm", "It makes the whole world warm", "It warms up the planet if there's no sun", "Keeps the world warm". This was the one issue, in fact, where pupils' reasons for a definite value judgment showed such strong evidence of misinformation or partial understanding.

For all the issues, the pupils who checked 'unsure' and who offered a reason for this response generally indicated that they didn't know enough about the topic in question to have an opinion: "I've never heard of it", "I don't know what it is", "I'm too young", "I don't have enough information", "I don't understand it", etc. Very occasionally pupils checked 'unsure' because they were genuinely undecided what to think, often because they saw both positive and negative features. The internet was a particular example of this, as noted earlier.

The evidence is that the majority of the pupils adopted a responsible approach when invited to express an opinion. When they offered a value judgment they could usually justify it with an acceptable reason, and they frequently refused to offer a judgment one way or the other when they considered that they were not in a position to offer an informed view on the issue in question, or when indeed they saw both good and bad features of the issue in question.

5.6.2 Focus group discussions

Focus group discussions took place at all four pupil stages. Two focus groups were formed in each participating school, each addressing a different given topic. Each group comprised four randomly selected pupils at the stage, and groups were managed and rated (as groups, not individuals) by the field officers who also undertook the assessments of pupils' practical skills in science and ICT. In total, the 148 field officers visited a total of 342 schools and rated 647 different focus groups (153 groups in 83 schools at P3; 159 groups in 85 schools at P5, 171 groups in 89 schools at P7, 164 groups in 83 schools at S2).

Three non-specialist scientific topics were identified that it was felt might engender discussion and debate among the pupils, and that would enable the field officers to rate the groups in terms of the various strands of the 5-14 National Guidelines for Developing Informed Attitudes, viz. 'Commitment to learning', 'Respect and care for self and others' and 'Social and environmental responsibility' (see Table 5.8).

Table 5.8 The strands relating to 'Developing informed attitudes'

The discussion topics were 'School Garden', 'Sparrows' (pupils to discuss a television news item about the rapid disappearance of the once commonplace house sparrow) and 'Recycling' (pupils jointly to design a school poster). 'School Garden' was used at P3, 'School Garden and 'Sparrows' at P5, and 'Sparrows' and 'Recycling' at P7 and S2. Field officers rated groups in terms of the strength of evidence they demonstrated of development in the different aspects of the three strands: 'little or no evidence' (no evidence or one relevant point made), 'some evidence' (two or three relevant points made by more than one pupil) and 'strong evidence (four or more relevant points made by more than one pupil).

During the one-day task orientation that the field officers received for all their practical assessment responsibilities in the survey, it proved impossible to devote as much time to the group discussions as had been hoped, although written guidance was provided for use in the field. Most importantly, it had not proved possible to conduct any rater agreement trials. These facts should be borne in mind when the results of this exercise are reviewed.

That said, the first finding of note is that there was no suggestion in the data of any rating differences between topics. Neither was there any marked difference in the ratings across the four stages, with the single exception of 'Social and environmental responsibility', which was rated less positively at P3 than at the other stages - although it is only for the aspect 'Shows awareness of the need for conservation (of resources, energy, endangered species)' that the rating difference reaches statistical significance (just 10% of the P3 pupil groups rated as demonstrating strong evidence of awareness compared with 20-25% at the other stages, and 50% of the P3 pupils having shown little or no evidence of awareness compared with around 30% at the other stages).

Given this general similarity in rating patterns, Figure 5.3 shows the general picture across stages and topics. Among the three strands, 'Respect and care for self and others' was the most positively rated, with 40% of the groups showing 'strong evidence' of this quality. This compares with under 30% for 'Social and environmental responsibility' and under 25% for 'Commitment to learning'.

Figure 5.3 The general picture across all stages

(% groups rated as shown: 647 groups in total, 150-170 per stage, from 342 schools)

As Figure 5.4 shows, both aspects of 'Respect and care for self and others' were rated similarly by the field officers. Within the strands 'Commitment to learning' and 'Social and environmental responsibility', however, there is quite marked variation from one aspect to another. 'Asking about evidence' was the least positively rated behaviour, with over half the groups rated as having shown little if any evidence of this during the discussions. And fully 40% of the groups were similarly rated for 'Recognising the need to find out more facts and/or ask questions about the issue'. Over 30% of the groups were judged as having shown little if any evidence of an awareness of the need for conservation; Figure 5.5 shows that at P3 this proportion increased to well over 50%.

Figure 5.4 The general picture by aspect within strand

(% groups rated as shown: 647 groups in total, 150-170 per stage, from 342 schools)

In addition to rating the groups, the field officers were invited to offer comments about them, and at each stage 50-60% did so. Overall, around a quarter of the groups were judged as having been reluctant to engage in discussion, either because of shyness, embarrassment or lack of interest in the topic. This proportion rose to around a third of the groups at S2. Another quarter were judged as having had good discussions, 'excellent' in some cases, with a small proportion at each stage - between 2% and 5% - proving knowledgeable about the topic. Another 3-4% of the groups at each stage were dominated by one particular member, and 1% of the groups ran out of time before they could enjoy a full discussion on the topic.

5.7 Summary

Over 1200 pupils completed questionnaires inviting information about their science lessons and exploring their familiarity and views about topical issues in science and medicine: over 300 S2 pupils in 30 secondary schools, over 400 P7 pupils in 40 primary schools and just under 500 P5 pupils in 47 primary schools. In addition, over 2500 pupils participated in focus group discussions about given scientific issues. Almost 650 focus groups were observed and rated for informed attitudes by the field officers.

The questionnaire samples were evenly divided by gender, and the large majority were English native speakers. Three-quarters of all the pupils were members of at least one club or other activity-based organisation outside school, the proportion decreasing with age: across the stages, half the pupils took part in at least one sport, a quarter were members of cubs;/scouts, brownies/guides or youth clubs, and a fifth participated in performing arts. Sport was markedly more popular among the boys than girls at every stage with the reverse holding for the performing arts. While the pupils' job aspirations were many and varied, they remained heavily gender typed. Science-relevant occupations were mentioned by around one in ten pupils at P5 rising to one in five at S2.

High proportions of pupils at all three stages had a quiet place to study at home, had home access to a computer and the internet, and had a calculator and dictionary available to them at home. There were no gender differences in terms of home resource access. The most common family pastimes were watching TV and videos, and listening to music. Other popular family activities were talking about free time activities, talking about films and TV programmes, talking about school work and progress, and playing sport. Reading or talking about books were much less popular activities, as were cultural outings of various types. There were some gender differences in engagement in family activities, with girls more frequently than boys talking with their families about their hobbies, their school work and progress, and books, while boys more frequently than girls played sport or games with family members, or otherwise kept fit with them.

In the science classroom whole class teaching predominated at all stages, and the most frequent individual activities were writing in a jotter or file, and completing worksheets. Using computers in class, working in the school grounds and visiting places outside school were less common, particularly at S2. On their own reports, the S2 pupils had more science homework than did their younger peers.

Science lessons were very interactive, according to the pupils, with a high level of questioning, answering and explaining, and teachers usually gave help when needed. Teachers expected pupils to work hard, and the pupils claimed that they found this easy to do in lessons. The majority of pupils wanted to do well in the subject, and worked hard on their topics and investigations, which they found interesting in general. Pupils were more evenly divided on whether they looked forward to lessons and enjoyed reading books about the subject, enthusiasm for science learning decreasing with increasing age. Most pupils considered science important for later learning in other subjects and for jobs, although perceptions of importance also decreased with increasing age.

The majority of the pupils found science an easy subject, were happy with the pace of work, were rarely left behind, and rarely found it difficult to catch up if they missed a lesson. Higher proportions of pupils at S2 than at P5 or P7 agreed that they were often or always given teacher feedback on progress in the form of levels, grades or test scores, and that short tests were common. Corrected work generally showed pupils where they had gone wrong, and pupils were typically shown by the teacher how to improve their work; these activities were more frequent at P5 than at P7 and S2. However, a relatively low proportion of pupils at each stage agreed that their teacher involved them in planning their next steps in learning. There were no differences between boys and girls in terms of their reports on their science learning.

On the evidence of this science survey and the previous social subjects survey conducted in 2002, there were some interesting, if expected, subject differences in lesson experience. Specifically, while both subjects were rated highly for factual knowledge transmission ('we learn a lot of facts') science was, not surprisingly, rated more highly than social subjects for exploration ('learning is science lessons is about asking 'Why?' and 'What if?'). In line with this, and still on the basis of the pupils' reports, tools and instruments were used more often in investigations in science lessons than in social subjects, and objects and artefacts were also more commonly used. In contrast, computers, audio and video tapes, and textbooks and reference books featured more strongly in social subjects classrooms than in science, according to the pupils. Finally, science was considered to be a more important subject than social subjects, both for further learning and for future jobs.

An enquiry into pupils' familiarity with 12 socially relevant issues in science and technology revealed a high degree of awareness of current issues among pupils, particularly at S2. Among those pupils who claimed to have heard of the term in question, the issues of most interest were the internet, cancer research and weapons of mass destruction and the issues of least interest were designer babies, cosmetic surgery and genetically modified foods. While there were no gender differences in awareness rates, there were quite strong and expected gender differences in topic interests. The issues the boys were most interested in were nuclear power, space exploration, robotics and weapons of mass destruction, while the girls' preferred issues were cancer research, designer babies and cosmetic surgery. When asked to offer an opinion on whether the issue concerned was 'good for society' or 'bad for society', the internet, cancer research and organ donation emerged as those most positively viewed in this sense, while weapons of mass destruction and global warming were the most negatively viewed. The majority of pupils declared themselves unsure of the value to society of designer babies, cosmetic surgery and genetically modified foods. Among the pupils offering a definite value judgment, the majority gave reasons that showed their views to be informed.

Finally, in focus group discussions, pupil groups were generally more highly rated for showing evidence of 'Respect and care for self and others' than for 'Commitment to learning' and 'Social and environmental responsibility'. The least well demonstrated attributes, within 'Commitment to learning', were 'Recognising the need to find out more facts and/or ask questions about the issue' and 'Asking about evidence'. There were no differences in rating patterns across stages or topics. This was an innovative and experimental interactive enquiry into pupils' informed attitudes, and questions remain about the validity and reliability of the field officers' ratings. In addition, a fairly high proportion of the pupil groups proved difficult to rate for any aspect, since a quarter of them, rising to a third at S2, were reluctant to engage in discussion at all. But the experience within this survey offers a good base for pursuing and refining this type of assessment in the future.

« Previous | Contents | Next »