Challenges in Primary Science

Meeting the Needs of Able Young Scientists at Key Stage Two

David Coates, Helen Wilson

• Publisher: David Fulton Publishers
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136599293
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

This practical and easy-to-use book enables teachers to challenge able children to develop their potential and to extend their thinking in primary science. It links theory to practice to develop understanding of what it means to be an able scientist; and empowers teachers to build on their existing good practice to build an inclusive science curriculum for able children.

Special features include: photocopiable resources that are linked to the National Curriculum and the QCA schemes of work; teacher guidance on the use of these resources and how they can be incorporated into normal primary science lessons; and suggestions for assessment.

1	Introduction

Science is all about thinking and questioning so it is a subject that is particularly suited for providing challenge for all children and especially the more able.

Gardner’s (1993) study on seven ‘creators of the modern era’ includes the profound thought that creative individuals are those who see old knowledge in new ways and generate novel ideas or products in their domain. This is eminently true of the heroes of scientific thinking, such as Galileo or Einstein. Scientists need to be able to think creatively and deeply.

Diezmann and Watters (2000) make a comparison between evolutionary thinkers and revolutionary thinkers: ‘Evolutionary thinkers build on and extend existing ideas and apply those ideas in new ways, while revolutionary thinkers are those creative geniuses who contribute ideas that lead to paradigm shifts.’ This sums up beautifully the greatest scientists – they are the revolutionary thinkers. They are the ones who have had the courage to break away from the mould of the accepted thinking of their times. For a host of reasons, this type of thinking needs to be encouraged and nurtured.

The education of able pupils is a rapidly developing area. It can be argued that, in the long term, the consequences of developing children’s scientific potential will have an impact at both a personal level and a national level, in relation to national competitiveness. These ideas are highlighted in the National Curriculum:

Science stimulates and excites pupils’ curiosity about phenomena and events in the world around them. Because science links direct practical experience with ideas, it can engage learners at many levels. Scientific method is about developing and evaluating explanations through experimental evidence and modelling. This is a spur to critical and creative thought. Through science, pupils understand how major scientific ideas contribute to technological change – impacting on industry, business and medicine and improving quality of life.

(DfEE/QCA 1999)

When challenging the gifted and talented, it is not always necessary to look towards the amount of work that is done but rather to the cognitive demands that it makes upon children and, in particular, the use of higher order thinking skills. The need for such challenge is highlighted in Ofsted inspections of the provision for able pupils: ‘To reach their full potential G & T pupils need challenging tasks that stretch them intellectually’ (Ofsted 2000). Montgomery (1990) notes that,

In order to achieve developmental differentiation it is necessary to redefine the central objectives in teaching as:

• to enable the pupils to think efficiently, and

• to communicate those thoughts succinctly, whatever subject content is under study.

It is salutary to pause and wonder if the weight of the curriculum in the primary school is such that there may be little time for the children to think hard because there is so much work to be done!

However, science teaching in the primary school need not fall into this trap. It can give children opportunities to extend their thought processes in some depth. We believe that it is possible to challenge children within science using the normal curriculum and activities that are commonplace in the primary classroom. The potential for challenge is there – it is a case of uncovering the cognitive curriculum.

Therefore, we argue that pupils’ experience of primary school science should be exciting and be characterised by conceptual challenge, preparing them for the increased demands of the secondary school science curriculum. It is our contention that this more imaginative, creative and challenging approach will result in raised standards for the whole class. In support of this Mike Tomlinson, Director of Inspection at Easthamstead, Berkshire stated ‘If schools are willing and able to meet the needs of able pupils, standards are raised for all pupils’ (20 June 1995).

Identification

In the literature of different countries, many terms are used to describe the children for whom this work is aimed, for example ‘able’, ‘highly able’, ‘gifted and talented’. The QCA Guidance on Teaching Gifted and Talented Pupils (2001a) defines gifted and talented as follows:

• Gifted pupils are those who have abilities in one or more subjects in the statutory school curriculum other than art and design, music and PE.

• Talented pupils as those who have abilities in art and design, music, PE, or in sports or performing arts such as dance or drama.

In our experience, teachers tend to be reluctant to describe a child as gifted and their natural inclination is to assume that this implies exceptional ability, such as that seen in Beethoven, Einstein or Picasso. Hence it is not unusual to hear the claim that ‘There are no gifted children here.’ However, the above definitions are norm-referenced, which means that the word ‘ability’ relates to the school population, and not the population as a whole. Therefore gifted pupils will be found in the majority of classrooms and in all schools. This book is designed to help meet the learning needs of such children.

Porter (1999) defines gifted young children as ‘Those who have the capacity to learn at a pace and level of complexity that is significantly advanced of their age peers.’ Maker (1982) suggests that gifted pupils differ from their classmates in three ways: the pace at which they learn, the depth of their understanding, and the interest they hold.

The current trend towards increased emphasis on literacy and numeracy, often to the detriment of science, may well contribute to the difficulty of identifying a pupil who is able within this particular subject. What then are the characteristics of a primary-aged pupil who is specifically gifted in science and are these different from those that would be exhibited in other subjects?

Of course some children are good all-rounders and are gifted in most subjects. However, we have personally met children in our teaching careers who are gifted in science but not necessarily in other areas. They have been articulate about their discoveries and have had an enthusiasm in science, which was far from evident in other subjects. One of these children was particularly memorable. He had a reputation as a ‘naughty boy’ whose behaviour often left much to be desired. He struggled with his English and mathematics and often ran out of patience. However, in science, if he was allowed to report his findings or express his understanding verbally, he could genuinely shine. His reply to the question at the end of the lesson, ‘Who can tell me what they have learnt today?’ was often staggering. This was obviously good for his self-esteem and it also showed a potential, which probably would not otherwise have been evident.

A child’s lack of ability in literacy and numeracy may hinder their long-term progress in science, but this need not necessarily be the case at the primary level. Science is different and it is helpful to consider possible indicators of ability within this particular discipline.

Methods of identification

Both qualitative and quantitative data can be used for the identification of a pupil who is able in science. However, quantitative data alone, such as the use of Standard Assessment Tests (SATs), may result in some pupils being missed. Freeman (1998) highlights the need for identification processes to provide ‘multiple opportunities, rather than multiple hurdles’ so that all children can be given opportunities to maximise their potential.

Primary teachers tend to know their pupils well and teacher nomination has much to recommend it. However, care must be taken that this form of identification is evidence based and not purely subjective. Pupils’ behaviour can sometimes influence judgements and also ability in science is not always linked to ability in literacy or numeracy.

Parental nomination can also be revealing, as parents possess information about their child’s particular interests and passions. This type of information can be gained by an extra question during interviews at parents’ evenings, such as ‘What do you think are your child’s particular interests or strengths?’ Taking this further, Hymer and Michel (2002) have developed a questionnaire and a multiple intelligence profile for parents to provide valuable information about their child.

Self- and peer nomination also have potential and, if handled sensitively, can be a useful source of data. As children become more involved in their own learning, they are more aware of their own abilities and so may, for example, choose to nominate themselves for optional science activities. In terms of peer nomination, answers to questions, such as ‘Who would you go to for help with your science?’ can be revealing.

O’Brien (1998) emphasises the fact that the scientifically more able child does not just show good knowledge about science. Sometimes they use a vocabulary that is beyond other pupils of their age. They may ask perceptive, provocative questions and apply their background knowledge of the subject in an interesting way, making links in their understanding. They also may be intensely curious about science and become engrossed in ideas and investigations.

A checklist can be a useful tool to help teachers in this identification process and particularly can help to maintain the subject specificity. The specific characteristics of able primary children in relation to science, which we devised from our work with gifted children (Coates and Wilson 2001), may include some or all of the following:

• a natural curiosity about the world and the way things work

• an enjoyment of hypothesising

• an ability to express scientific knowledge and understanding logically and coherently

• scientific vocabulary used accurately and appropriately

• an ability to transfer knowledge and understanding from one situation to another

• an ability to spot and describe patterns in results

• innovation in experimental design and/or in the collecting and recording of data.

The QCA Guidance on Teaching Gifted and Talented Pupils (2001a) includes another extensive checklist of 23 characteristics, from which a range may be evident in scientifically gifted children.

However, there are obviously some limitations to any checklist. For example, they can indicate the type of giftedness but not the degree and they do not indicate how much of the criteria needs to be met to be considered gifted (Porter 1999). The QCA checklist is designed to be used with all children from Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 4. It is self-evident that children aged five will not exhibit the same characteristics as a more able 16-year-old.

Monitoring pupils’ performance when faced with cognitive challenge in science is possibly the most powerful identification tool. This is identification through provision, which Freeman (1998) calls the sports model. The sports analogy is apposite because, in order to discover who is the best high jumper, the bar is raised for all and we watch to see who can make the leap. Therefore providing the whole class with challenging tasks and questions will result in opportunities for pupils to demonstrate the depth of their thinking and understanding. Once again, we can watch to see who makes the leap. The learning context is therefore seen to be an essential feature of this more flexible means of identification. Hence aptitude and provision are considered together to find and provide for potential strengths and abilities.

Identification therefore occurs when teachers recognise the advanced way in which a child responds to the curriculum. This method of teaching is a continuous and exciting process, which motivates the more able pupils and encourages them to identify themselves through their achievements. If this identification process does not rely solely on the pupils’ literacy skills, this approach will also help to identify the vulnerable groups of more able pupils who may otherwise underachieve. If children are not given the opportunities to respond to cognitively challenging questions and activities, their true ability may never be uncovered.

Using the challenge strategies discussed in Chapter 2 should facilitate the identification of ability in science through challenging provision for all the pupils. The range of identification tools taken together will provide a fuller picture of ability as shown in Figure 1.1. A deeper understanding of the pupils’ ability will then feedback into the planning of appropriate provision.

Figure 1.1 Identification of ability in science through provision

Why bother?

In light of the great burdens already placed on primary teachers, why add to this by introducing a need to identify able children within individual subjects? Identification of able children only makes sense when it is linked to effective provision and this, in turn, is linked to the individual child’s rights. George (1997) states that:

Educationalists are agreed that it is every child’s right to go as far and as fast as possible along every dimension of the school curriculum in order to reach their considerable potential, and that this is one of the main aims of education.

All children surely have a right not to be bored but to be excited by their learning.

However, do gifted children merit special attention? Surely gifted pupils can achieve highly without significant support from their teacher? Eyre (1997) notes that it was a commonly held belief that able children would always be successful, regardless of their circumstances, but that this has been disproved. Eyre states that research, such as that done by Freeman (1991), in her account of gifted children growing up, indicates that support and encouragement are vital to success.

This has also been highlighted in a recent white paper:

Too often in the past, the most able have not got the targeted support they need. There has sometimes been a reluctance to recognise their particular needs and a feeling that they will do well anyway. In the past, too many of our able children have not done as well as they should.

(DfES 2002)

Gagné (1991 cited in Davis and Rimm 1998), working in Canada, notes that catalysts, such as environmental, intrapersonal and motivational, are nee...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• Chapter 2 Planning for challenge
• Chapter 3 Assessment
• Chapter 4 Sc1 Scientific enquiry
• Chapter 5 Sc2 Life processes and living things
• Chapter 6 Sc3 Materials and their properties
• Chapter 7 Sc4 Physical processes
• References
• Index