Colleagues,
As part of our wider curriculum review, I'd like to explore how we're developing STEM thinking across KS3.
One area we're considering is whether pupils experience enough progression in the way they apply scientific knowledge to unfamiliar problems.
At present, pupils encounter plenty of individual STEM activities, but these aren't always connected into a clear progression.
I'd like us to consider whether we could identify some common expectations across Years 7–9, for example:
• Interpreting and evaluating data
• Designing investigations
• Identifying variables and controlling them appropriately
• Using mathematical models within Science
• Evaluating evidence and drawing justified conclusions
• Applying scientific knowledge to real-world problems
I'm particularly interested in how we can avoid STEM becoming a collection of interesting activities rather than a coherent part of the curriculum.
It would be useful to compare what other schools are doing and identify approaches that are sustainable for classroom teachers.
Aisha
The mathematical modelling point is particularly relevant from our side.
We're finding that pupils can perform the mathematical process when it's explicitly taught in Maths, but don't always recognise when the same mathematics is useful in another subject.
I'd be interested in identifying a small number of recurring mathematical concepts that Science and Maths could deliberately reinforce together.
I think there's a similar opportunity with disciplinary vocabulary.
If pupils repeatedly encounter words such as evaluate, evidence, justify and interpret across subjects, they should become more confident with the underlying expectations rather than treating them as subject-specific terminology.
This could work particularly well if we agree on the thinking behaviours we want pupils to develop rather than creating another cross-curricular programme.
For example, interpreting evidence and justifying a conclusion are valuable habits regardless of whether the evidence comes from a Science experiment, a historical source or a mathematical model.
I agree.
I'd rather identify a small number of shared principles than create another document that departments have to complete.
I'll take this to the next curriculum meeting and see whether we can map the existing curriculum against a few common STEM thinking expectations.
Could we also include some examples of careers or real-world applications?
We've found that pupils engage much more readily when they can see why a particular skill matters beyond the classroom.
It doesn't need to become a careers lesson — just making the application explicit seems to help.