Divided opinions on 'coordinated science'

The number of students opting for science-related courses at the university is worrying - only three out of one thousand students (0.3 per cent) are choosing science subjects at tertiary level, Paul Pace, senior lecturer at the University of Malta Education Department, said during a recent seminar.

He said a coordinated science curriculum would be the first step towards a solution, explaining that this would give students an opportunity to "do science" rather than to "know about science" therefore creating a shift from the present situation. He said that the priority should be the well-being of the students.

Dr Pace also said that many science teachers were not satisfied with the present situation where the students were exposed to only one science subject. At the end of the day, they end up knowing very little scientific content.

"The Way Forward - Coordinated Science?" was the subject of a seminar organised by the Maltese Association for Science Educators (MASE) on January 24 at the Robert Samut Hall in Floriana. The event was open to all science educators who discussed the implications of the implementation of coordinated science.

The seminar was opened by the president of MASE, Dario Pirotta, who highlighted the importance of the involvement of all science educators in the planning of the new system, before it is implemented as part of the curriculum.

Doreen Mizzi, chairman of the focus group that worked on the draft coordinated science curriculum, talked about its aims and objectives and gave a detailed description of the three tracks being proposed. The themes of each track were also mentioned together with an evaluation of the whole project. Ms Mizzi also emphasised that the coordinated science curriculum was "a step forward to provide an educational experience that prepares future citizens to actively participate, respond effectively and contribute to the numerous demands to a rapidly changing society due to continual development in science and technology".

However, she said that, for the project to be successful, the change needed to be introduced gradually by taking an evolutionary approach that is continuously supported.

Paul Xuereb, head of the Physics Department at the Junior College, said he was in favour of a holistic approach to science but against the way its introduction was being planned. He said there has not been enough consultation with the post-secondary sector, which plays a very important part in the students' scientific formation.

He referred to the current situation in England where a curriculum similar to the one proposed in Malta does not seem to be doing well. In England, students opting to what was similar to coordinated science were performing less than their counterparts studying the single sciences. Although coordinated science was supposed to be more interesting and relevant to the students, the number of students taking up a science subject at A-level was decreasing.

Mr Xuereb said that if the coordinated science curriculum was to be implemented, one must ensure that the students are adequately prepared for the separate sciences at Advanced and Intermediate levels at post-secondary.

Alfred Vella, dean of the Faculty of Science at the University of Malta, said he was against the coordinated science curriculum as it is being proposed. Prof. Vella said it was wrong to abolish the separate science subjects because the educational system should not interfere with the choices of students who choose to further their studies and pursue science-related careers.

Prof. Vella criticised the draft curriculum as proposed by the focus group, saying it was not balanced in Science content. He pointed out that, for instance, the chemistry content included in the proposed curriculum is about a third of what is being presently taught.

Prof. Vella expressed his concern as to whether coordinated science was really the solution. He said the problem was not in our present syllabi but in the way science is being taught. He emphasised that teachers can make all the difference.

Ray Camilleri, director of Curriculum Management, said one must find answers to a number of questions before implementing the change. "Do the stakeholders agree with the change?", "Are there enough trained personnel for such a change?" and "What about the examination system?"

Mr Camilleri added that one must observe the situation in neighbouring countries and act accordingly. One must also take note of one's own needs, resources and economic stability before implementing a new system.

Frank Ventura, chairman of the Matsec board, said that the number of students who are not sitting for any Science subjects at O-level was worrying.

From a Matsec point of view, Prof. Ventura said there a lot of procedures one must study before issuing an exam paper for a new subject. He mentioned for example, the adequacy of the syllabus, the amount of lessons covering the syllabus, any overlap with other subjects and the cost it will eventually amount to.

He said no examination board will agree to the launching of a new system unless there is a guarantee of success on the educational level and economic income.

MUT president John Bencini criticised the fact that the implementation of coordinated science was taking so long, even though the NMC had given specific time frames. As a union, the MUT was interested in the well-being of every student.

Since all students have a right to learn science, he said he agreed with the implementation especially with regard to those students who did not want to specialise in science subjects at post-secondary level. At the same time, he was not in favour of abolishing the separate sciences, as these were important for those students who wanted to choose science-related courses at university level.

Mr Bencini stressed the need for re-training teachers. He said one could not implement a new system without providing adequate training to all science educators. He concluded that if the system were to be implemented, the union would make sure that the new system was designed for the well-being of all students.

MASE members were given the opportunity to voice their opinion through a survey. The MASE will shortly be publishing a final statement. The MASE president encouraged further discussion through the MASE website www.masemalta.com.