As usual I received several press releases about the number of entries to GCSEs* around exam time. What was unusual is that they warned of lower entry numbers for GCSEs this year, including chemistry. I’ve been at the RSC since 2018 and often read about declining attainment in chemistry, but never lower entry numbers. So, why now?Â
As usual I received several press releases about the number of entries to GCSEs* around exam time (bit.ly/4oHa9kO). What was unusual is that they warned of lower entry numbers for GCSEs this year, including chemistry. I’ve been at the RSC since 2018 and often read about declining attainment in chemistry, but never lower entry numbers. So, why now?Â
Various theories sprang to mind: lack of teachers/specialist teachers; schools being conservative with entries; a smaller student cohort this year; and recognised problems of teacher recruitment and retention. What’s stayed with me, though, is that this is some kind of chicken-and-egg problem.
Because there are fewer teachers and specialist teachers, more learners take combined science GCSE rather than triple. It stands to reason that with fewer specialists teaching chemistry (and physics), while learners will still have a great learning experience it may, perhaps, not be an amazing one. (But maybe someone should look into this …?) And this experience could make them less likely to go on to study chemistry or physics or German, another subject with lower entry numbers. There may be fewer opportunities for learners to do practical work (an area often impacted by budgets), to make the connection between classroom learning, their everyday lives and future careers, and, ultimately, to believe chemistry is for them.
Does fewer learners taking GCSE chemistry result in a smaller pool going on to study the subject post-16?
And, if schools have fewer science teachers and specialists, they’re less likely to offer individual sciences and more likely to offer combined science at GCSE, which surely helps take the pressure off timetabling and resourcing.
Pooling resources
The question is: does fewer learners taking GCSE chemistry result in a smaller pool going on to study the subject post-16? And an even smaller pool continuing into higher education, ultimately leading to an ever-decreasing cohort of science teacher trainees?
There is reason to believe this is not a chicken-and-egg scenario – the readers of this magazine. The dedicated, hardworking science teachers, chemists, physicists and biologists and more, who show learners that science is relevant to their everyday lives and could be their career. Also, the many colleagues at the RSC, IOP, RSB, ASE, Ogden Trust and more who advocate a simplified and well-resourced science pathway taught by subject specialists.
I’m writing this just before GCSE results are published. Until then (and as soon as I’ve finished typing) I will be keeping my fingers crossed that this year’s successful candidates are reading Education in Chemistry in 2030 as they embark on their first year as science teachers.
*If any PR people are reading this, please send me press releases about teaching science in Scotland! We don’t get any.