In The Science Teaching Survey 2022, 73% of teachers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland said that the amount of curriculum content was ‘too much’ across all sciences. This year we asked respondents a number of questions about the curriculum to understand what changes, if any, should be made. This included questions about the programmes of study as well as vocational and technical routes into scientific careers.
The six topics teachers say need changing
We asked teachers in England and Northern Ireland about four topics in GCSE combined science and two topics from GCSE chemistry. These topics were identified in our previous surveys as ‘problem’ units and concepts that need to be revised:
- quantitative chemistry
- electrolysis of molten ionic liquids and aqueous ionic solutions
- condensation polymerisation (GCSE chemistry only)
- the earth’s water resources and obtaining potable water
- life cycle assessment and recycling
- ceramics and composite materials (GCSE chemistry only).
In the 2023 survey, teachers told us what should be kept without change, what should be kept but revised and what should be removed. They also shared the reasons for these curriculum changes.
Now, thinking generally, what one change to the education system do you think would have the biggest positive impact in science teaching in your nation?
Make [the] curriculum more relevant and interesting – too much is archaic/outdated or irrelevant to the modern world.
Topics should be relevant to pupils' lives. Most will not study science beyond school level so should leave school as scientifically literate citizens which comes from a relevant curriculum.
Pupils don’t see relevance of topic to everyday life.
The curriculum being created by science teachers and technicians in collaboration with students, to make it more inclusive and prepare better for the future with what is being taught, make it more relevant.
What changes should be made to the curriculum? (mainstream state secondary, England only)
Teachers share their reasons for curriculum changes
The changes that teachers recommend remove concepts that they feel most students do not need to learn. Reducing the amount of content in the curriculum could alleviate some of the demands on teachers’ time and create additional opportunities for practical experiments and to contextualise learning.
For example, in the case of ceramics and composite materials (a GCSE chemistry-only topic), 44% of teachers agreed that it should be removed from the curriculum entirely. Some teachers commented that the topic was not relevant to students studying chemistry post-16.
Verbatim comments in the survey reveal how teachers feel about these six ‘problem’ topics:
Quantitative chemistry:
Some content is very complex and should be done at A level (….) it’s just too challenging, especially for students who have to do the separate science (i.e. not chosen).
Life cycle assessment and recycling:
This is an important topic for understanding the processes involved in creating products and their impact on the world/climate. Giving more real examples of changes in processes and how to reduce impact on climate change would make it more interesting and relevant.
Ceramics/composite materials:
Ceramics is difficult to get students interested in. It is hard to link to the rest of the curriculum and seems to have free links to other areas. It is learning rather than understanding.
Teachers said that the following topics should be kept in the curriculum but revised:
- the earth’s water resources and obtaining potable water – 45%
- life cycle assessment and recycling – 44%
- quantitative chemistry – 41% (although 46% want it to be kept unchanged)
- electrolysis of molten ionic liquids and aqueous ionic solutions – 35% (although 38% want it to be kept unchanged)
The most commonly cited reasons for the changes were:
- to ensure the content demonstrates relevance or value or both
- to simplify, streamline, or reduce the content, or a combination of these
- to review the difficulty level.
Teachers said that the following topics should be removed from the curriculum:
- ceramics and composite materials (GCSE Chemistry only) – 44%
- condensation polymerisation (GCSE Chemistry only) – 26% (although 30% want it to be kept unchanged)
The most commonly cited reasons for the changes were:
- the topic lacks relevancy or value or both – 47%
- the topic is too difficult or challenging or both – 45%
Some teachers felt that the following topics should be kept without change:
- quantitative chemistry – 46%
- electrolysis of molten ionic liquids and aqueous ionic solutions – 38%
- condensation polymerisation – 30%
Redefine the curriculum for a sustainable future
From our Green Shoots research, we know that four in five educators see climate change and sustainability topics as a priority for the chemistry curriculum. We must equip young people with the knowledge to understand these global issues so that they can participate in efforts to tackle them.
In The Science Teaching Survey 2023, we asked teachers what they thought was the best way to incorporate these topics into GCSE Science, Transition Year (Ireland) and National 5s (Scotland). We did not capture data for Wales as the curriculum was undergoing reform at the time of the survey.
Best way to include more climate change and sustainability content (mainstream state secondary, by nation)
When asked how best to include more climate change content in the curriculum, teachers also indicated the reasons for their choice:
| What is the best way to include more climate change? | Most common reason |
|---|---|
| As an interdisciplinary module (biology, chemistry and physics) focusing on solving the problems of the future | Links with/involves all sciences/not subject-specific |
| Make the ‘real life applications’ within each discipline explicit | Demonstrates relevance/students can relate |
| Increase the amount of substantive climate change and sustainability content within each discipline | Important/relevant topic |
| I don’t want more climate change and sustainability content | Enough climate content already/too much repetition |
Teachers who answered: ‘Make the ‘real-life applications’ within each discipline explicit’.
I think the best way to teach this is by making it explicit to students how it will actually impact their lives, this is best done through highlighting the real-life applications. Building this into the curriculum would support delivering this to students as it would not be an 'extra' on top of the already heavy content.
This allows students to become aware of some of the challenges that they will face in their future and take ownership of their responses to those challenges. By studying solutions and ways to mitigate climate change, students can take ownership and become empowered to build a better future for themselves.
Teachers who answered: ‘As an interdisciplinary module (biology, chemistry and physics) focusing on solving the problems of the future:
I have taught interdisciplinary before and when it works, it works. However the sheer quantity of course material to cover at N5 in all sciences means that this could be a struggle to do.
It gives an opportunity to obtain a holistic approach rather than focusing on separate disciplines for learning how society is working on solving needs produced by climate change and sustainability.
Awareness of vocational routes into scientific careers varies
Vocational and technical routes into scientific careers give students a practical work-related approach to learning. Apprenticeships (vocational) offer formal learning while on the job. Technical and applied higher education qualifications include HNCs, HNDs and foundation degrees.
In the survey, we asked teachers about their awareness of the different vocational routes into scientific careers and how confident they felt in advocating them.
- Less than half (44%) of teachers in England said that they felt ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ confident in providing information on technical and/or vocational routes into scientific careers. The situation is similar in Scotland (47%). However, less than a third (31%) of teachers in Wales said they felt ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ confident in providing information on these routes.
- The majority (80%) of teachers stated ‘lack of knowledge’ as the reason for not advocating vocational pathways
- Just under a third (30%) of teachers cited ‘school is focused on academic pathways’ as the reason for not advocating vocational pathways. There were some nation-specific differences, too.
- Only 12% of teachers in England are aware of and advocate for T-levels. T-levels are equivalent to three A-levels and give students a mix of classroom time and industry experience
- Over a third of teachers said they are ‘very or somewhat unconfident’ at advocating for technical and vocational routes into scientific careers. Teachers were much more confident at ‘linking the curriculum to real life’, ‘linking curriculum to scientific careers’ and ‘providing information on academic routes into science careers’.
In which of the following ways do you/your science department access support to demonstrate career opportunities and to contextualise lesson content?
Career support:
This is the area we are weakest in – there is so little time to organise external speakers and trips and also an issue with funding for transport, cover for additional staff etc.
Now, thinking generally, what one change to the education system do you think would have the biggest positive impact in science education in your nation?
Making the curriculum seem more relevant, frequently asked by students ‘why do we need to know this?’ or ‘what’s the point?
Reducing the content of the science curriculum so that more time can be given to problem-solving skills, which they appear to need more and more of. There is not enough curriculum time to teach both the content and skills well enough. Students are always pressurised to complete the curriculum. There would be more enjoyment if concepts could be taught at a more relaxed pace and time given to do practical work without it being rushed.
Greater accessibility and respect of vocational qualifications.
Academic and vocational pathways that teachers said they are aware of and advocate for (mainstream state secondary, England only)
Barriers preventing teachers from advocating vocational pathways (mainstream state secondary, all nations)
Table 21: What are the barriers, if any, that prevent you from advocating vocational pathways to your students?
How confident do you feel about the following areas?
Bars do not add up to 100% as we have omitted the data for those who selected 'Not applicable/Don’t include in my teaching'.
Confidence in contexts and careers (mainstream state secondary, by nation)
Bars do not add up to 100% as we have omitted the data for those who selected 'Don't know / not sure'.
When asked what would make teachers feel more confident in advocating vocational and technical pathways, some teachers said:
More links with further education – outside speakers and admissions staff, careers events etc.
CPD on how to present and integrate this into my lessons.
Specific training on what jobs are out there in the science fields as I am not sure. Up-to-date information each year on the skills society will need. Support linking real-life skills to science.
What we are doing
Our mission to enhance the landscape of chemistry education extends from primary through to further education and beyond.
We are driven by the values of inclusion, sustainability and practical work for a modern 11–19 chemistry curriculum. For example, we have been working closely with Qualifications Wales and WJEC (awarding body) to ensure the new science curriculum in Wales is fit for purpose.
Vocational and technical routes are essential for ensuring that careers in chemistry are accessible to all young people. They provide pathways to a range of different occupations aligned with industry needs. We will collaborate with education partners, schools and colleges to raise awareness of these pathways. Our aim is to help teachers feel confident discussing them and giving students a comprehensive understanding of their options.
In our support for chemistry education and teachers, we will continue to champion contexts, careers and diverse role models. Our aim is to help young people understand the purpose of science and see a clear path to chemical science careers.
To find out about a range of careers in the chemical sciences, visit A Future in Chemistry.
Explore the full data set behind the Science Teaching Survey 2023
Download questions and data explainer
Data tables
You can download all data tables by using the form below. Your data will be used to help us measure engagement depth, not to send unsolicited email communications, and will be retained for 12 months.
Download data tables
