Just how inclusive is your science curriculum?

There are four questions I urge you to go and investigate in your school... 

1. If I struggled to read and write, how much of the learning in your year 9 and 10 programmes would be accessible to me?
2. How many of the scientists who are acknowledged in your school's science curriculum are women? Māori? Pasifika? BIPOC? 
3. How many Māori and Pasifika students graduate from your school with 3 UE STEM subjects? 
4. How many Māori and Pasifika students from your school go on to a science pathway?
   
   

I am a science teacher. I enjoy science. But the more I learn about culturally sustaining pedagogy, students with diverse learning needs, equity, and feminism, the more frustrated I have become with science. To become a 'scientist,' you have to find a way to pay for a bachelor's degree, master's degree, and a PhD. If you are lucky you might then get a lowly paid postdoc position after that. This is hard for individuals to afford, never mind for those people with a family for which they are financially responsible. If you don't have a family that can support you financially through all these years of studying, what are the chances that you become a scientist? 

I also think about the experience I had of science at school. All assessments required a lot of reading and writing, even at years 9 and 10. If you are a student who struggles with literacy, how accessible is our school science curriculum to you? And as a result, what impact does that have on your scientific literacy in the future? In the misinformation crisis that the world currently finds itself in, surely science teachers should be focussing on designing the most inclusive and accessible curriculum possible? (Note, I do not suggest we water down the science, only that we make it more accessible). 

It is with the above in mind that I spent a significant amount of effort in the last few years working on how the science ideas that we teach in year 9 and 10 can be made more accessible through the way I design learning. Here are a few of the things that stand out from this year. 

Engineering challenges

Physics has many great opportunities for students to explore scientific concepts in a hands on way. One of the tried and tested ways to do that is by haivng students design small vehicles within a set of constraints, and then race them. As a result, I saw students investigate aerodynamics, how to reduce friction, how mass and accelleration might relate to each other, and a whole bunch more. The vehicle on the right was particularly memorable as the group experimented with using wax on the bottom of their racer to help it glide down the racing ramp easier.

 

Other engineering challenges include building an arthropod that is able to move. For this, students had to learn about the characteristics and taxonomy of different arthropods, as well as learning about the physics of simple machines to help their arthropods move. The arthropod machine on the right used a wheel and axle to create their insect that moves with wind. It was particularly rewarding being able to work with a hard materials teacher who was able to help students construct and prototype their designs in the workshop. 

 

Art 

A favourite medium that I like to use when encouraging students to communicate science ideas is through art. This has involved everything from photo essays, illustrations, performances and more. However this year I was able to take my love for art and science to a new level by co-teaching with an art teacher. Students explored a socio-scientific issue of their choice from a provided list. As they explored the scientific, cultural, economic, ethical and other perspectives of their issue, they created a series of artworks to represent their understanding of these. 

The image below shows the Alexander Calder inspired mobiles students made to represent the different persepctivees around their socio-scientific issue. 

A critical skills in science is observation. Few things teaches observation as well as teaching drawing skills in art. Hence, another task that worked really well was having students create a nature journal page of a native species of plant. You can see the task instructions below along with an example of a student's work. 

Prioritising tools with UDL features

A fairly simple way of creating a more inclusive classroom is just about being more selective with the tools we use. For example, Quiziss is a en excellent tool. While it works much like Kahoot, Quizizz has the added benefit of being able to read the questions out loud to students. The tools is gamified for extra engagement and gives students instant feedback. On the teacher side of things, this tool is compatable with Google Classroom which means I can keep track of student understanding really easily. 

I am also a serious user of Google Classroom. When used effectively, it means that students can use speech to text tools to read instructions for tasks. Hence, I religiously post every single instruction for my class on Google Classroom. It also means that it easy to make videos, audio recordings, diagrams, etc. available for students. 

 

Where to next?

In 2024 I hope to continue exploring ways to make science more inclusive, I am looking forward to working with the new level 1 NCEA standards to find ways to assess these in the most creative, inclusive way possible. 

Why have an online home for your class?

In an effort to remind myself why I believe in e-learning tools, as we as to encourage others to do the same, I have created a summary that might be useful. Feel free to share and distribute. You can access the Google Drive drawing here for editing and easy sharing purposes.


I would love your feedback on this, as always!

Are exams an anachronism?

As exam season for schools and universities around the country draws to a close, I find myself (again) reflecting on the purpose, point and goals of exams. Hence, I have a few questions for Mr Exam. I would appreciate if someone could pass the questions on. Or at least speculate on what his answers might be.

• Why should students attempt to 'prove' their understanding in an artificial context? What is the point of recalling facts and skills in an artificial environment? Would you go into a meeting or a presentation at work without your notes? You can take notes into a job interview. When solving complex problems at work you are certainly not expected to solve them from memory! We do careful research, we collaborate, we seek feedback, we refine. When I have struggled with particular aspects of a role, I often make notes for myself. I check over them to help me complete the task. I struggle to understand why students should be expected to recall without notes, without their peers, without context and without an authentic purpose? When you have to use recall for your drivers licence test, there is a purpose. What is the point of recall in exams?
  
  
• Do exams value recall or deep thinking? All of the most profound moments of realisation, understanding, application in my life, and I am betting yours, did not happen in exams. It involved deeply thinking in light of new experiences, information, discussion and so forth. Does this mean that exams are not about thinking? Perhaps they are about regurgitating and recalling your thinking? Although, I suspect it might also be about recalling someone else's thinking and not your own.
  
• Do exams value efficiency or efficacy, quality? When students are given contrived time limits to recall and apply facts, skills, etc. are we suggesting that it is how fast you are able to do things, not how well? Are we suggesting that learning, Knowledge, skills, capabilities can be packaged into two and three hour blocks?
  
• How can we possibly allow for diversity when we are expecting a whole country to sit the same exams? There are piles of research about the euro-centric approach in education, and piles about Maori and Pacifica frequently not 'achieving' at the same rate off pakeha (New Zealand European). This phenomenon is evident in other countries with indigenous peoples too. By making a whole country, district, class, year level sit the same exam, by standardising, are we ignoring cultural capital? Are we suggesting that cultural capital does not matter in academia? Why should all students know and think the same things? Does standardisation ignore and devalue diversity? 
  
  
  
•  Are exams about equity or equality? All students are expected to write the external 'English exam' or 'Maths exam' at the same time, regardless of what is going on for them in their life. +Ros MacEachern gives a great example from her last school where students were leaving exams early because they were hungry. How many other factors like this is going on? Is that fair?
  
• Are we assessing their writing or their understanding? All students, regardless of their strengths, preferences, cultural traditions, personal experiences, family situations and so forth at expected to 'write' exams. They have to give written explanations of their understanding. All teachers know students who can give incredible verbal explanations but struggle to do so in writing. We all learn differently, communicate differently yet exams seem to ignore this? Where do exams make space for different modes of thinking, learning and communicating?

• How do exams help to build a better future? The value that we attach to exams, explicitly, implicitly and tacitly, are they actually making the world a better place? What values are they instilling in students? What are they teaching students, the community and families to value? What are they teaching about how we assess and individual? What are they teaching about what matters about an individual? Or about a group?

As far as I can tell, exams are not about learning, not about thinking and not about Knowledge. So what is the point? Are they just an an anachronism? A tool from a past age where standardisation was more valued than diversity? Where Knowlege was confined to the pages of linear books rather than the multi-dimensional reality of the real world? If the purpose of exams were about learning and thinking, how would they be different? Are we still making kids and students write exams because coming up with something better has simply been lumped into the too hard basket?