#ASEchat Archive

The Association for Science Education (ASE) promotes excellence in science teaching and learning. Follow #ASEchat Mondays at 3pm ET.

Monday October 1, 2018
3:00 PM EDT

  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:01 PM EDT
    Tonight in #ASEChat we are discussing the provision of alternative routes for GCSE science, following @YeasminMortuza article in EiS
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:02 PM EDT
    Whilst people are grabbing their mugs of tea - do you teach in a school where both triple and double science are available to students? #ASEChat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:04 PM EDT
    Terminology for tonight's #ASEChat - Triple science = bio, chemistry and physics GCSE; double science = combined science GCSE
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:04 PM EDT
    #ASEChat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:05 PM EDT
    I am interested to know who makes the final choice of which science course is followed - school, student or parent (or other)? #ASEChat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1
  • damianainscough Oct 1 @ 3:06 PM EDT
    #ASEChat now till 9.00pm
    • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:04 PM EDT
      Terminology for tonight's #ASEChat - Triple science = bio, chemistry and physics GCSE; double science = combined science GCSE
  • jpscience Oct 1 @ 3:06 PM EDT
    @HelpfulScience Hi, have you any interesting ways pupils can record their findings in primary science (to share with ITE students) please? #primaryscience #asechat
  • PaulCaden1 Oct 1 @ 3:07 PM EDT
    Well our school is quite unique -from ones I know. Triple science is a free option to all pupils. But i do know that parental involvement has a large bearing. #ASEChat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:07 PM EDT
    and how does the science choice affect choices of other curriculum subjects? #asechat
    • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:05 PM EDT
      I am interested to know who makes the final choice of which science course is followed - school, student or parent (or other)? #ASEChat
      In reply to @PaulCaden1
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:08 PM EDT
    Would you prefer to retain core+add+further add? #ASEChat
    In reply to @ROwen_84
  • TheScienceBreak Oct 1 @ 3:08 PM EDT
    I know some schools start everyone on triple and then change towards end of year. Others there is a small class of triple because less interest. #ASEchat
  • owl_physics Oct 1 @ 3:10 PM EDT
    Struggling with A Level Physics? try these resources on Electromagnetic Induction! https://t.co/xZyGBJiiXb #ukedchat #science #asechat #nqtchat #ittchat #aussieED #edchat #physics #physicsteaching #physicsalevel
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:10 PM EDT
    I am no longer sure what 'harder' means. Triple is 3 subjects so more study time and exams, but is it harder than say double + geography? No idea, and JCQ data is not too illuminating #ASEChat
    In reply to @TheScienceBreak
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:11 PM EDT
    Do parents consider triple science is a better preparation for A Level because of the 'name on the tin'? #ASEChat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1
  • TheScienceBreak Oct 1 @ 3:11 PM EDT
    Last I looked at the IGCSE had single, coordinated (double), and triple science. Few do single. #ASEchat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:11 PM EDT
    So in these cases double science is sen as less academically demanding than triple? #ASEChat
    In reply to @TheScienceBreak
  • stormeducation Oct 1 @ 3:12 PM EDT
    Do double/triple science count as 2/3 GCSE's? #asechat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:13 PM EDT
    Not easy to compare the performance of the first cohort in 2018 because as you say the intakes for each route are not comparable #ASEChat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1, @TheScienceBreak
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:13 PM EDT
    Yes #ASEchat
    In reply to @stormeducation
  • damianainscough Oct 1 @ 3:14 PM EDT
    To what extent does the additional content in triple better prepare students for A levels in sciences? #ASEchat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:14 PM EDT
    Is the triple /double choice supporting diversity, who does triple? #ASEchat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:15 PM EDT
    @ROwen_84 raises an interesting point - are schools still trying to squeeze the time allowed for triple science rather than give parity with other GCSE subjects on the timetable? #ASEChat
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:15 PM EDT
    The combination of anchoring and disparity of cohort entered nationally suggests Paul is correct no? I haven't directly compared marks and papers but our data seems to bare this out #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @PaulCaden1, @TheScienceBreak
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:16 PM EDT
    What reasons do schools have for offering triple? #asechat
  • drhollywilliams Oct 1 @ 3:16 PM EDT
    We do entry level, dual and triple. Lots of dialogue between students, teachers and parents. Teacher assessments and knowledge of students decide triple/dual route in year 9 but lots of change in year 11 when entries are made. Message is that dual isn’t easier just less #ASEChat
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:17 PM EDT
    Putting my head on the block I suggest triple is worse preparation for A level than double because of time pressures in the timetable not allowing the development of broader science skills - too much content #ASEChat
    In reply to @damianainscough
  • damianainscough Oct 1 @ 3:17 PM EDT
    Due to the limited amount of time often given for triple (sometimes same as for double), it *is* more demanding. #ASEChat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @TheScienceBreak
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:17 PM EDT
    Hardly justification for squeezing a child's curriculum from 14! #ASEChat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:18 PM EDT
    I'm not sure we have the flex in timetables to teach in school hours if reintroduced in many schools. Cuts to backroom staff mean I'm not sure there is the capacity to build a timetable 2 different science slots other than "stealing" a slot from an open bucket subject #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • staffdb66 Oct 1 @ 3:18 PM EDT
    We still get extra time for triple science .... #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @ROwen_84
  • margaretflem Oct 1 @ 3:19 PM EDT
    Drat ! #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:20 PM EDT
    Lets hope that the tests used to determine a child's future are robust and measure what is important #ASEChat
    In reply to @TheScienceBreak
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:20 PM EDT
    What % of TS students then go on to do science A Levels? Do you ‘allow’ your double scientists on to A level courses? #asechat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1
  • damianainscough Oct 1 @ 3:21 PM EDT
    #ASEChat Can the EiS article by @YeasminMortuza be made open access, @theASE (with a full page membership ad, of course)? One of the most important articles I have read there for some time.
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:21 PM EDT
    That does not surprise me. I wonder how often resource implications are considered when deciding to offer triple? It may be the children entered for double get very meagre provision #ASEChat (see case study 5, p16 EiS)
    In reply to @ROwen_84
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:22 PM EDT
    About 10% curriculum time in Y10 /11 for each science, same as arts humanities etc? #ASEChat
    In reply to @staffdb66, @ROwen_84
  • margaretflem Oct 1 @ 3:23 PM EDT
    #ASEchat I have seen this work well and it does mean students can all still have a balanced curriculum
    In reply to @staffdb66, @damianainscough, @ViciaScience
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:23 PM EDT
    We do both. But triple is accelerated (which I personally hate, but live with) and is only for top performers at KS3. #ASEchat don't think we're unusual, but wish we had triple option as in nqt school
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:24 PM EDT
    I'm not sure double (esp new spec) is really an inherent disadvantage. I suspect a large part of the 'advantage' is triple students tend to be taught with an eye to a-level while many double students are taught with the assumption GCSE results is the end game. #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:24 PM EDT
    We have quite a few very successful combined Science students that have gone onto A levels. #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:24 PM EDT
    Sounds good, but then the numbers in a 25 period week do not stack up well for triple science provision. Has science brought about a fortnightly timetable in your school? #ASEChat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1, @damianainscough
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:25 PM EDT
    Wish all those involved in science education were members, what a strong voice that would be #ASEchat
  • margaretflem Oct 1 @ 3:25 PM EDT
    #ASEchat but choosing the TS students is a real challenge if you are to avoid unconscious bias in selection
    In reply to @staffdb66, @damianainscough, @ViciaScience
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:25 PM EDT
    I'd be inclined to agree. I also fear accelerated triple puts people off taking science at ks5 as it turns into such a treadmill at ks4 #ASEChat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @damianainscough
  • MrChurchTweets Oct 1 @ 3:26 PM EDT
    #ASEchat #prisci #primaryrocks
  • PaulCaden1 Oct 1 @ 3:26 PM EDT
    We have a two week timetable so it’s always out of 50 #ASEchat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @damianainscough
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:26 PM EDT
    Do you think that starting in Y9 (ie making choices in Y8) is a price worth paying for the flexibility in your system? #ASEChat
    In reply to @drhollywilliams
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:27 PM EDT
    Pardon, Margaret? #ASEChat
    In reply to @margaretflem, @NeedhamL56
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:27 PM EDT
    We have had he same but not convinced that triple should take up another option slot as it narrows the curriculum #asechat
    In reply to @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:28 PM EDT
    Is triple 'compulsory' for high fliers, whether they dream of a scientific future or not? #ASEChat
    In reply to @chemDrK
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:28 PM EDT
    we get 10% for science. I think open bucket get less (150 mins compared to 250 mins a week). We do double content across Y9-10 and do mastery/ tighter consolidation in Y11. Should point out our cohort start significantly below national #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @staffdb66
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:28 PM EDT
    Self fulfilling prophesy, think about all the potential science or technical career options they are now excluded from #asechat @ASPIRES2science
    In reply to @ROwen_84, @PaulCaden1, @ASPIRES2science
  • TheScienceBreak Oct 1 @ 3:29 PM EDT
    Year 9 seems too soon to start GCSE science... #ASEChat
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:29 PM EDT
    True. I really struggle to reconcile it. At the moment only the top 60 pupils get to do it because it's accelerated. But I understand argument against option. Also wouldn't want to start GCSEs in y9... So... Answers in a postcard, please! ;-) #ASEchat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:30 PM EDT
    And that must influence the quality of the teaching? #ASEChat We would suggest that all children should benefit from a scientific education irrespective of whether they plan to follow a scientific career
    In reply to @ROwen_84, @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:30 PM EDT
    Also as the new EEF report suggests Science language is a key focus and the technical language can be a huge barrier for students. Science exams and texts always have a very high reading age #asechat
    In reply to @PaulCaden1, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:30 PM EDT
    Strongly agree. we have strong progression to a-level virtually all off double and never found offering triple as an add on made much difference to their start to Y12. #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1, @ASPIRES2science
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:31 PM EDT
    So in some ways triple in your school could be counter productive? #ASEChat
    • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:25 PM EDT
      I'd be inclined to agree. I also fear accelerated triple puts people off taking science at ks5 as it turns into such a treadmill at ks4 #ASEChat
      In reply to @ViciaScience, @damianainscough
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:31 PM EDT
    Nope. And I do speak to year 9s at parents evening and assure them they haven't 'failed' if they choose double! It's optional. But you have to be given the option, iyswim... #ASEChat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:31 PM EDT
    I think that’s the point Niki there are no answers that will suit every school, student, future aspirations #asechat
    In reply to @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:32 PM EDT
    It's a worry I've always had. But it seems to be a pretty common thing to do. So I appear to be in the minority ;-) I had high hopes when Maintaining Curiosity mentioned it as an issue but... We're still here! #ASEChat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:33 PM EDT
    What continues to amaze me is within a national system there is such diversity of provision - and not all reflecting local conditions. Just asking the question 'How much time for GCSE science?" produces huge variation in response #ASEChat
    In reply to @ROwen_84, @staffdb66
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:33 PM EDT
    I think it ‘might be’ in many school. As a default for the students that grasp Science more easily #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @chemDrK
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:34 PM EDT
    I wish there was only one route, then everyone would feel they could do science not feel like the also rans #asechat @ASPIRES2science if in the double group
  • JonScott46 Oct 1 @ 3:34 PM EDT
    #ASEchat when triple was introduced a consultant arrived at our school to discuss various models. The school happened to be very supportive and we had 10% time for each science, but there were some much less favourable models put forward and schools use many different ones now
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @chemDrK
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:34 PM EDT
    I would agree that GCSE should start in Y10 - KS3 is too important. Why narrow children's interests too early? #ASEChat
    In reply to @TheScienceBreak
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:35 PM EDT
    I suspect it's the engendered sense of belief generated by more affluent schools teaching triple. A mastery of double science content doesn't/shouldn't imply a lower quality of teaching. Potentially a greater mastery of core concepts above less well embedded breadth #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:35 PM EDT
    My answer would be to provide a single route at GCSE for science, with different provision for those for whom GCSE is not an appropriate qualification #ASEChat
    In reply to @chemDrK, @AJTF71
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:35 PM EDT
    Too many as far as I’m concerned. I’ve seen some very strange patterns of entry over the past few years. Some schools moving to entering all students for triple in the hope they will get 2 good outcomes #asechat
    In reply to @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • teacherchalky1 Oct 1 @ 3:36 PM EDT
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:37 PM EDT
    Sounds good! All the schools I've taught in have done '3 in same time as 2' model... And schools often have less time for science than they used to (I think?) #ASEChat
    In reply to @JonScott46, @ViciaScience
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:37 PM EDT
    I want a single Science GCSE back for those students that find Science a real struggle or possibly those that prefer other subjects. #asechat #notgonnahappen
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @chemDrK
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:37 PM EDT
    I'm coming round to that kind of idea, I must admit... #ASEchat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @AJTF71
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:39 PM EDT
    As you say, single science is dead in the water whilst EBACC and P8 exist #ASEChat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:40 PM EDT
    Yes. Actually. That's what has changed, isn't it? There are fewer option blocks now. Hadn't made the connection. Although it's over 10 years since I taught in a school with optional triple block #ASEChat
    In reply to @staffdb66, @AJTF71, @ViciaScience
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:40 PM EDT
    We only had double and single Science when I started teaching. Students still went onto A levels. On another note we can’t recruit enough Science teachers as it is. So if more students do triple the who is going to teach them #asechat
    In reply to @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • JonScott46 Oct 1 @ 3:41 PM EDT
    #ASEchat Surely this is part of a larger debate around the purpose of the GCSE qualification. I've just been working with an international school and they asked a lot of sensible questions, including 'what is the purpose of this qualification?'
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @chemDrK, @AJTF71
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:41 PM EDT
    Such a shame. Great for some students there is IGCSE that can be taken in alternative provision #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @chemDrK
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:42 PM EDT
    Would this situation still exist now that double science is so much more like triple science than before? #ASEChat
    • staffdb66 Oct 1 @ 3:39 PM EDT
      We had 120 out of 200 do it 2 years ago through a both tops sets have to do it route... it didn't work as well..
      In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:42 PM EDT
    I think you've swung me from a pragmatic abandoning of triple into a political one @ViciaScience. Although outside of a fully comprehensive system many teachers with the most developed subject knowledge will gravitate to 'better easier schools regardless of triple/double #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1, @ViciaScience
  • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:43 PM EDT
    I hear this a lot and I don't really get it. For history, yes, because GCSE has a narrow selection of periods and KS3 allows broader development of a sense of the full sweep of the thing.... #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @TheScienceBreak
  • doc_kristy Oct 1 @ 3:43 PM EDT
    Whole cohort do triple except for a small number (around 10-15) #ASEchat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:44 PM EDT
    So what is the purpose of GCSE as you ask? It is becoming more of a school accountability measure than something of benefit to students. I am sure if GCSE was abolished there would be little impact except on comparison data between schools #ASEChat
    In reply to @JonScott46, @chemDrK, @AJTF71
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:45 PM EDT
    Apart from the advantages for students, teachers would have one GCSE course to prepare, employers would understand the qualification #asechat reduced elitism, same starting point at FE
  • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:45 PM EDT
    ...but in science, I don't get what is fundamentally different about KS3 and GCSE. Completely agree shouldn't be piling on past paper Qs and exam focus in Y7 but can't see why 5 year curriculum design to get to GCSE is wrong. Open to persuasion, though. #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @TheScienceBreak
  • JonScott46 Oct 1 @ 3:45 PM EDT
    #ASEchat It's a good route through for a school with large cohorts going into the sciences...if you can recruit the physics teachers—why don't more graduates go into teaching (physicists in particular)?
    In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:46 PM EDT
    Ofqual have provided an analytical tool to compare outcomes for different subjects. Try comparing B,P and C results for 2018 and see if the result suggests we need three different GCSEs #ASEChat
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:46 PM EDT
    Or is it about STEM subjects linked to jobs for the future? To boost the economy? #notcynical #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @JonScott46, @chemDrK
  • lauralamble Oct 1 @ 3:47 PM EDT
    We have 1 triple class out of cohort of 240. We invite them to do it, and they can turn it down. Triple students have 3 additional hours of science per fortnight, all done after school. Last year we offered 55 students a place on triple, only 29 took it up #ASEchat
    In reply to @ViciaScience
  • doc_kristy Oct 1 @ 3:47 PM EDT
    But teaching your specialism at GCSE at least is an attractive prospect for grads considering teaching. I worry that if ‘double’ were the only option then everyone would be a ‘science’ teacher and I believe strongly in subject specialists #asechat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:48 PM EDT
    For me there are three reasons for questioning a double/triple GCSE route:1. social equality and mobility; 2. the politics of school accountability; 3. making best use of scarce resources. Tied up in 1 is a load of stuff about careers, aspirations, self worth #ASEChat
    In reply to @ROwen_84, @NeedhamL56, @PaulCaden1
  • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:49 PM EDT
    I'm also in favour of one route for GCSE. All the best intentions of x2, x3 get subsumed by the reality, which (anecdotally) is top sets do triple. #ASEChat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 3:49 PM EDT
    It's possible to 'blurs' GCSE and KS3 in Year 9 by keeping out certain more challenging topics but teaching to tighter more GCSE acceptable answers and moving beyond the traditionally more vague 'KS3 answers'. The KS3 curriculum is now pretty heavy regardless. #asechat
    In reply to @dodiscimus, @ViciaScience, @TheScienceBreak
  • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:50 PM EDT
    (I know there are plenty of exceptions) #asechat
    In reply to @NeedhamL56
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:50 PM EDT
    You can still teach in your specialism. You just need to be creative with timings that’s all. Also as a biologist I’ve had to teach all 3 more often than not as we have had very few chemists and physicists #asechat
    In reply to @doc_kristy, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • chemDrK Oct 1 @ 3:50 PM EDT
    I teach chem only in a double group. We just split the timetabling three ways. #ASEChat
    In reply to @doc_kristy, @AJTF71, @ViciaScience
  • ChemLSFC Oct 1 @ 3:51 PM EDT
    Fancy teaching post-16 chemistry at a thriving sixth-form college? You've got 1 week to apply https://t.co/JEzWDjQz3g #asechat #ukedchat #NobelPrize
  • doc_kristy Oct 1 @ 3:51 PM EDT
    You can indeed but the temptation for SLT in tough times is for everyone to be a science teacher... been there, had it done to me, left the school... #ASEchat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:51 PM EDT
    That sounds better to me than 25% doing triple and 75% doing double which the EiS article suggests is the norm #asechat
    In reply to @doc_kristy
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:52 PM EDT
    Many people like the Science teacher route for accountability too 😬 #asechat
    In reply to @doc_kristy, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:53 PM EDT
    Aargh - forgetting my hashtags #asechat
    • dodiscimus Oct 1 @ 3:52 PM EDT
      Within science? Isn't it just that the range of subjects narrows, and because science is core it sits unaffected by that transition?
      In reply to @ViciaScience, @TheScienceBreak
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:53 PM EDT
    Which sends the message ‘your pants at science coz your not doing triple’ 3/4 cohort written off for future STEM careers. Let’s offer same to majority #ASEchat
    In reply to @dodiscimus
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:53 PM EDT
    https://t.co/hAOsiFxzYj #ASEChat
    • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:46 PM EDT
      Ofqual have provided an analytical tool to compare outcomes for different subjects. Try comparing B,P and C results for 2018 and see if the result suggests we need three different GCSEs #ASEChat
  • JonScott46 Oct 1 @ 3:53 PM EDT
    #asechat It's common practice, as an intervention strategy, for triple science students to drop a science in Y11. So there are a group of students who have certainly not experienced a broad science curriculum. How do we feel about the 'compulsory' nature of the courses?
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:55 PM EDT
    So do you think that triple science is providing the technical expertise the country requires? I heard that we had plenty of science graduates, but not all choose to follow a science career #ASEChat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @JonScott46, @chemDrK
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:55 PM EDT
    In my experience that’s the norm. However, we have only had one set of students through the new quals so I’m assuming that it will take a few years to settle down. #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @doc_kristy
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:56 PM EDT
    Don't confuse the number of GCSE certificates awarded with the disciplines of science being taught. Trilogy AQA is in effect 3 sciences with 2 certs #asechat
    In reply to @doc_kristy, @AJTF71, @chemDrK
  • doc_kristy Oct 1 @ 3:56 PM EDT
    Yep, one teacher to hammer for PRP targets... #ASEChat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @chemDrK, @ViciaScience
  • NeedhamL56 - Moderator Oct 1 @ 3:57 PM EDT
    Oh no! Not only telling majority you’re no good, but minority opt out coz expected to do extra after school!Where are the future scientists coming from? #ASEchat
    In reply to @lauralamble, @ViciaScience
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:57 PM EDT
    A level maybe, but not sure about about GCSE. Lots of routes into technical qualifications that don’t require triple Science #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @JonScott46, @chemDrK
  • doc_kristy Oct 1 @ 3:58 PM EDT
    Not my circus, not my monkeys.... People with SLT hats on look at it differently. I know what is being done in local schools and it isn’t everyone teaching to their strengths that’s for sure... #asechat
    In reply to @ViciaScience, @AJTF71, @chemDrK
  • ViciaScience Oct 1 @ 3:59 PM EDT
    This is a different topic - but we do not provide sufficient breadth of science courses post 16 #ASEChat
    In reply to @AJTF71, @JonScott46, @chemDrK
  • AJTF71 Oct 1 @ 3:59 PM EDT
    Added to this if a teacher spreads themselves too thinly across all 3 disciplines then it’s difficult to become an expert teacher #asechat
    In reply to @doc_kristy, @ViciaScience, @chemDrK
  • ROwen_84 Oct 1 @ 4:00 PM EDT
    Thanks @ViciaScience @NeedhamL56 and others. Helpful in fleshing out thoughts ahead of this years parent's/options evenings #asechat