OUTDOOR SCIENCEA co-ordinated approach to high-quality teaching and learning in fieldwork for science education

A report by the

Association for Science Education Outdoor Science Working Group

1 ForewordIn his autobiography, written as an oldman, Charles Darwin rememberedthat “When ten years old I went forthree weeks to Plas Edwards on thesea-coast in Wales, I was very muchinterested and surprised at seeing alarge black and scarlet Hemipterousinsect, many moths (Zygæna) and aCicindela, which are not found inShropshire”. That childhoodexperience formed the great man’slife work. Paul Nurse, Nobel Prizewinner and today’s President of theRoyal Society, speaks passionately ofhis schoolboy memories of countingspiders’ webs in his garden as theessential introduction to his scientificcareer. I too, in my undistinguishedway, was taken on a school field tripto the Field Studies Council’s MalhamTarn Field Centre in Yorkshire at theage of fourteen, and at oncedecided to study biology.

That experience is shared bythousands of my fellow biologists –and by thousands more who,although they did not themselvesbecome scientists, were introducedto the joys of nature in a manner farmore direct and fulfilling than thatprovided by the most spectaculartelevision programme, vivid book,or talented teacher. The study ofbiology, geology and the rest is aliving experience, and withoutfieldwork it can be (and often is)killed stone dead. All our youngpeople should have the chance tofeel the excitement that Darwindid and I am glad to give myenthusiastic support to the ASE’svision of bringing field work back tothe centre of science education.

Professor Steve Jones, PresidentAssociation for Science Education

2

SummaryCompelling evidence from research points to the wide-ranging educationalbenefits of teaching and learning science through fieldwork* in the natural andbuilt environments. Yet, despite the strengths and advantages that fieldworkcan bring to teaching at all ages, there has been a long-term and continuingdecline in the provision and condition of outdoor education in science.

The Association for Science Education’s Outdoor Science Working Group(OSWG) believes that this trend is detrimental to science education. In 2010,the OSWG, sponsored by the Nuffield Foundation, hosted a series of five,themed ‘Inspirational Outdoor Science’ seminars aimed at catalysing andgathering support, and providing a clear future direction.

The six recommendations published in this report are the product of thediscussions which involved over 100 participants. As such, they provide a strongfoundation for a shared and coherent approach towards increased uptake andimproved quality of teaching and learning through fieldwork in scienceeducation.

*Fieldwork here indicates all educational activities from early years through to post-16

which take place outside the classroom and make use of the outdoor natural and built

environments.

Outdoor Science • Foreword and Summary

3

Recommendation 3Performance management and designations (for example,to AST or Excellent Teacher level) should include anopportunity for early-career teachers to demonstrate theireffective use of fieldwork and for more experiencedteachers to demonstrate their own role in providingfieldwork training for colleagues in other departments andschools (including across age phases and transitions).

2 RecommendationsRecommendation 1Future reviews of initial teacher training, Qualified TeacherStatus standards and continuing professional developmentmust ensure that fieldwork training is expected andprovided for all trainee science teachers. A co-ordinatedprogramme of teacher training in fieldwork shouldtherefore be established to promote effective pedagogyfor all university tutors and school teachers involved inpre-service and early career training.

Recommendation 2A dedicated outdoor science web-site, aimed at teachers,technicians and outdoor educators, should be created tosignpost, exchange and compare high-quality fieldworktraining resources. The website should encompass localand context-specific support and include contacts forexpert advisers, local support networks, existing goodpractice, training events and fieldwork providers as wellas published materials.

4

Recommendation 4Awarding bodies should be provided with the flexibilityand support to significantly increase open-endedsummative assessment and assessments that recogniseskills which are primarily developed through fieldwork.

Outdoor Science • Recommendations

Recommendation 5A co-ordinated research programme should be developedto further investigate the full range of educational impactsof fieldwork in science including case studies in formal/informal contexts, day/residential venues, local/remotesites and rural/urban communities.

Recommendation 6Leading educational bodies, learned societies and high-profile supporters of outdoor education should usetheir combined influence to support positive attitudestowards fieldwork in science amongst their contacts andaudiences (including headteachers, governors andparents). These institutions and individuals should focusparticularly on areas such as raising the profile of fieldworkin whole school policies and development plans, a reductionin health and safety bureaucracy and the development ofin-service professional development programmes.

5

for students at Key Stages 3 and 4 ininner-city schools and that wheresuch provision did occasionally occur,it tended to focus on particular areasof the science curriculum, such asbiology and ecology7.

3.3Further research shows that thepotential wider educational benefitsof fieldwork – including teamwork,motivation and enthusiasm for thesubject and its potential to influencepositively the choice of science as afuture subject to study – are valuedless highly by secondary scienceteachers than by their geographycounterparts8. There is also evidencethat trainee science teachers arereceiving a variable level of training tosupport fieldwork, with somereceiving none at all.9Whilst thisevidence is uneven, it is consistent,and has been for many years; taken

1 Dierking, L. et al. (2003) Policy statementof the “informal science education” adhoc committee

2 House of Commons Education and SkillsCommittee (2005) Education outside theclassroom

3 Department for Education and Skills(DfES) (2006) Learning outside theclassroom manifesto

4 Fisher, A. (2001) The demise of fieldworkas an integral part of science education inUK schools

5 Tilling, S. (2004) Fieldwork in UK secondaryschools: influences and provision

6 Wellcome Trust (2003) Life study: BiologyA level in the 21st century

7 Glackin, M. (2007) Using urban greenspace to teach science

8 Tilling, S. (2004) Fieldwork in UK secondaryschools: influences and provision

9 Kendall, S. et al. (2006) Education outsidethe classroom: research to identify whattraining is offered by initial teachertraining institutions

3 Background3.1In recent years, researchers and policy makers across the world haveincreasingly called for greaterattention to be paid to the educationalpotential of out-of-school settings,citing the many benefits, and indeed,the necessity, of learning in contextsother than the classroom1. In the UK,there has been a clear commitment tothe provision of learning opportunitiesbeyond those offered by classroom-based experiences. For example, in2005, the Education and Skills SelectCommittee stated that: ‘Educationoutside the classroom is of significantbenefit to students. Academicfieldwork clearly enhances theteaching of science and geography...’2

In November 2006, following therecommendations outlined by theSelect Committee, the Departmentfor Education and Schools launcheda Learning Outside the ClassroomManifesto3. The Manifesto states thatall children educated in Englandshould gain direct experience oflearning in different contexts.

3.2However, whilst governmentdocuments and research findings pointto the benefits of fieldwork, it wouldappear that such opportunities arerarely taken up in practice. Indeed,some research points to a decline in theprovision and condition of fieldwork atprimary and secondary levels, and thatthis is a long-term trend in GCSE andA-level science4,5. There is evidencethat access to fieldwork opportunities –and the advantages that are therebybestowed – is skewed towards theindependent sector, and that thedecline in A-level biology fieldworkhas been more marked in state sectorschools6. A study in London foundthat that there are few plannedopportunities for science fieldwork

together these snapshots suggest thatthere has been a decline in sciencefieldwork and that without effectiveintervention the decline will continue.

6

3.4For a number of years, the OutdoorScience Working Group (OSWG) ofthe Association for Science Education(ASE) (for current membership, seeappendix), has been working towardsa strategy for identifying and tacklingthe key challenges facing all thosewho promote fieldwork, includingteachers, teacher educators, non-governmental agencies (NGOs),policy-makers, inspectors andadvisors, and other committedindividuals and institutions.

3.5The OSWG believes that the trendsdescribed above are detrimental toscience education. We believe that allstudents deserve to benefit from arange of high-quality fieldworkopportunities (not just in biology andecology but also in chemistry, earthscience and physics) with thepotential to gain knowledge, skillsand experiences in school grounds,local parks, and in other urban andrural open spaces. However, we alsoacknowledge the challenges faced byteachers in providing suchopportunities and note that there aremany possible reasons why fieldworkis not being used to its maximumcapacity. For example, the issues ofhealth and safety, risk managementand cost are amongst the mostsignificant factors reported as limitingfieldwork10. Reviewing the literatureon learning outside the classroom,Rickinson et al. also highlightedteachers’ confidence and expertise inteaching and learning outdoors;requirements of school and universitycurricula and timetables; difficultiesdue to shortages of time, resourcesand support; and more generally thesusceptibility of fieldwork to the ‘wider

changes in the education sector andbeyond’11. A recent report for NaturalEngland noted that:

10 O’Donnell et al. (2006) Educationoutside the classroom: An assessment ofactivity and practice in schools and localauthorities

11 Rickinson et al. (2004) A review ofresearch on outdoor learning

12 Dillon, J. (2010) Beyond barriers tolearning outside the classroom in naturalenvironments

13 House of Commons Children, Schools andFamilies Committee (2010) Transformingeducation outside the classroom

14 Ofsted (2010) Science Survey Visits.Generic grade descriptors andsupplementary subject-specific guidancefor inspectors on making judgementsduring visits to schools

15 Department for Education (2010) Theimportance of teaching

The challenges facing schoolsinclude those frequently mentionedsuch as the risk of accidents, costand curriculum pressures. However,another set of challenges exists, atlocal, institutional and personallevels. These challenges includeteachers’ confidence, self-efficacyand their access to training in usingnatural environments close to theschool and further afield.12

3.6Nevertheless, despite the number andscale of the challenges, we areencouraged by the continued interestin learning outside the classroomreflected by the conclusions andrecommendations in the recent reportfrom the House of Commons Children,Schools and Families Committee13 andthe direct reference to fieldwork in theOfsted science subject specificguidance (2010) for inspectors onmaking judgements on subject surveyvisits to schools14. We are furtherencouraged by the possibilities offeredby the recent Schools White Paper, TheImportance of Teaching (2010) aroundthe review of initial teacher training,QTS standards and continuingprofessional development15.

Outdoor Science • Background

7

3.7In the light of the real need toimprove the quantity and quality offieldwork coupled with distinctpossibilities to affect change, theOSWG instigated and ran a series ofday-long themed seminars andtwilight consultation events during2010, to energise the debate, toprovide a catalyst for change, and togive the momentum necessary toaddress this major weakness in theprovision of science education in theUK, and perhaps elsewhere. Theseminars and the production of thisreport were kindly supported andfunded by the Nuffield Foundation.

3.8The themes of the seminars wereinitial teacher education; assessment;learning in informal contexts;continuing professional development;

and policy. The themes of the fiveseminars were chosen by the OSWGbecause they have been identifiedconsistently throughout scienceeducation as strategically critical forbuilding the capacity to deliver highquality science fieldwork inschools.16,17

3.9The seminars and consultation eventswere held in a range of locations andwere attended by more than 100participants, including: teachers andlecturers; academics and researchers;representatives of the learnedsocieties; professional associations;NGOs and the charitable sector;government and nongovernmentagencies; awarding bodies; advisersand inspectors; employers andbusiness (see appendix for a full list ofparticipants).

3.10Each event comprised introductorypresentations followed by focusedand facilitated discussion on specificthemed questions and generalquestions including:

• What have been the successes andfailures and resulting impacts, ofrecent outdoor learning initiativeson teaching and learningparticularly in science?

• How do we identify and build onexisting good practice in terms ofoutdoor learning in science?

• What changes in curriculum,assessment, pedagogy, training andsupporting resources are needed toenable teachers of science to worktogether developing outdoorlearning in science?

• What can we learn from research,in the UK and elsewhere, abouteffective outdoor learning and howcan we implement transferablesolutions into mainstream scienceeducation?

16 Barker, S. et al. (2002) Teaching biologyoutside the classroom. Is it heading forextinction?

17 Tilling, S. and Dillon, J. (2007) Initialteacher education and the outdoorclassroom. Standards for the future

8

4.1 Trainee and early careerteachers seminar held at theUniversity of Birmingham

4.1.1 Strengthening initialteacher training (ITT)ITT should provide science teacherswith the competence, confidenceand commitment to undertakefieldwork with minimal supportduring their induction as a Newly-Qualified Teacher (NQT). NQTs needto be able to plan and undertakefieldwork relatively autonomously,without the need for significant buy-in from senior management, whilstavoiding prohibitive costs. Duringtheir initial teacher training they needpractical experience of planning andleading fieldwork and being able toevaluate and share experiences withother trainee teachers, particularlythose working in other schools.Undertaking fieldwork during theirinitial teacher training also providespositive encouragement throughhighlighting that these activities areexpected of science teachers.Research has shown that the level offieldwork training in initial teachertraining courses is variable, so thatfuture reviews of the ITT curriculummust ensure that fieldwork training isprovided for all trainee teachers18. A set of minimum requirements –known as the Malham Protocol – wereidentified in an earlier workshophosted by the ASE’s Outdoor ScienceWorking Group19.

4.1.2 Building CPD for newly-qualified teachers andtechniciansNewly-qualified teachers face manydemands on their time and CPDdedicated to fieldwork may be a lowpriority, even if it is made available.However, CPD for early-careerteachers is important and needs toinclude support to biology specialistsfor ‘thinking outside the ecologybox’, developing an open mind tothe potential of fieldwork across thesciences amongst all science teachersand offering ideas and resources tostimulate new practices. Techniciansalso need professional developmentrelated to fieldwork approaches andequipment construction.

4.1.3 Providing dedicatedsupport for curriculumdevelopers Teachers who develop schemes ofwork require an understanding of,and competence in, fieldwork. Suchteachers do not necessarily haveexperience of fieldwork and wouldbenefit from a single, authoritativeand up-to-date source of reference.

18 Kendall, S. et al. (2006) Educationoutside the classroom: research toidentify what training is offered byinitial teacher training institutions

19 Tilling, S. and Dillon, J. (2007) Initialteacher education and the outdoorclassroom. Standards for the future

Outdoor Science • Issues emerging from the seminars

4 Issues emerging from the seminars

The key issues that emerged from the five seminars are summarised in thefollowing sections. There is considerable overlap in areas such as initialteacher training, CPD, resource development, increased collaboration, andinfluencing attitudes and values towards fieldwork. The key issues wereused to develop recommendations; each recommendation was chosenbecause it reflected issues which emerged as critical in two or more of theseminars.

9

4.1.4 Strengtheningcollaboration within schoolsSuccessful fieldwork activities dependon collaboration which itself dependson existing collaborative structureswithin schools. Where these are strong,training days run by a local AdvancedSkills Teacher/Excellent Teacher/Leading Teacher can be excellentways to move schools forward in theprovision of high quality fieldwork.

4.2 Continuing ProfessionalDevelopment (CPD) seminarheld at the National ScienceLearning Centre, Universityof York

4.2.1 Creating dedicated CPD ProgrammesThe development of comprehensiveCPD programmes is critical, preferablylinked to an accreditation schemesuch as Chartered Science TeacherStatus and to a national accreditationsystem for learning outside theclassroom, Advanced Skills Teachers,or their equivalents, could be

involved in the development anddissemination of such packages. A particularly fruitful area for CPDdevelopment is the primary/secondarytransition (because of the CPDbenefits to all primary and secondarystaff involved). Such a programmemight address the disconnect oftennoted between the positive fieldworkattitudes and expectations of primaryschool pupils and those in the loweryears of secondary schools.

4.2.2 Standardisingperformance management andrecognising achievementIt is crucial to develop success criteria toenable teachers to evaluate the quality of their fieldwork and also to assess theprogress of pupils, the latter possiblybeing developed using an AssessingPupils’ Progress (APP) approach. Goodpractice might also be developed inlinking fieldwork to the performancemanagement systems used in schools.

10

4.2.3 Signposting high-qualityresourcesThere is a compelling need to providesupport and signposting for anyoneinvolved in promoting and deliveringfieldwork in terms of what resourcesare available. One realistic optionmight be a website containing:

• descriptions of a range of high-quality outdoor investigationalactivities;

• locations of local open spaces;

• site-specific identification keys;

• case studies of effective practice;

• assessment and evaluation tools;

together with recommendations onhow these might be amalgamatedinto effective CPD courses.

4.2.4 ‘Kitemarking’ goodpracticeA ‘Kitemark’ for science departmentscould be developed, involvingfieldwork, whilst a similar ‘Kitemark’,based on the Malham Protocol (seepara. 4.1.1) might be developed forproviders of initial teacher training.This ‘Kitemark’ could prove a usefulinstrument for parents assessingschools for the quality of scienceprovision offered to students, andmay therefore have a place in anymeasure of school performance.

assess their effectiveness and impact,to support their long-termdevelopment, and to pass on thefindings to others.

4.3 Assessment seminar held atthe Cambridge UniversityBotanic Garden

4.3.1 Developing open-endedassessmentThere is a tendency to think thatfieldwork will only take place inschools if there is a clear and explicitrequirement in specifications andassessment criteria. As a result, thereis a belief among many thatassessment and specifications are themost effective mechanism by whichto ensure that good fieldwork takesplace. However, summativeassessment can distort teaching andlearning activities, reducing thequality of the student experience andmeasuring only a narrow range ofskills and knowledge rather than allthat fieldwork can offer. Allowingawarding bodies to develop open-ended assessment could promote aculture of in-depth teaching andlearning which might inherentlyencompass the breadth of learningexperiences gained through fieldwork.

Outdoor Science • Issues emerging from the seminars

Adopting streamlined protocols suchas the Learning Outside theClassroom (LOtC) Quality Badgewould significantly reduce paperworkand remove one of the mainobstacles to fieldwork delivery.

4.2.5 Raising the profile and status of fieldworkThe level of science fieldworkprovision will only be raised if itsvalue is recognised at all levels – fromschool to national government. It willbe crucial to engage school leaders,including school improvementpartners, headteachers, governors,senior leadership and managementteams, CPD gatekeepers, heads ofscience and parents. Schools shouldalso focus on fieldwork in theirdevelopment plans. Evaluation andresearch must be central to allexisting and new initiatives designedto promote fieldwork in order to

11

4.3.2 Encouraging andrewarding fieldworkexperienceAssessment best promotes fieldworkwhen it assumes students have a rangeof experiences upon which they mightdraw in responding to questions.Assessment questions designed todraw on such real life experience togain higher marks/grades shouldpromote fieldwork without restrictingthe learning experience.

4.3.3 Encouraging a wider viewExperience shows that assessment is,by its nature, a driving force in thecompartmentalisation of the studentlearning experience. However, open-ended, carefully constructedassessment can be used toencourage students to bring differentlearning experiences together, andschools to think carefully about howsuch skills might be developedthrough cross-disciplinary projects.

4.3.4 Improved links betweenschools and fieldwork providersA great deal of good practice infieldwork lies outside the schoolscience education community andopportunities for fieldwork providersand teachers to come together,formally and informally, and learn fromeach other should be encouraged.

4.3.5 Influencing attitudes and valuesThe level and quality of fieldworkprovision will depend not just onassessment and awarding bodies, butalso on the attitudes and values of arange of people from teachers, seniormanagers, governors and parentsthrough to government decisionmakers such as the Department forEducation and Ofqual. A determinedand widespread approach is neededto change the perceived relevanceand value of fieldwork.

prolonged contacts between schools and providers. Building closerelationships with teachers (andheadteachers) is important to sustainwork. This might begin with a smallproject and build up to somethingwith greater impact and a degree ofsustainability enhanced by itspromotion through the website.

4.4.2 EncouragingcollaborationFor informal education to be effectivein supporting formal education,teachers need time and space tocollaborate and try out activitiesthemselves before teaching them.The links between informal educatorsand teachers could be strengthenedthrough the work of organisations

4.4 Learning in informalcontexts seminar held atthe Science Learning CentreSouth West

4.4.1 Supporting local andcontext-specific groups andindividualsInformal educators tend to be focusedregionally or locally and/or be context-specific, so may be unaware ofschemes run by other individuals,institutions or providers. In some casesenthusiastic individuals may benefitfrom partnership and communicationpossibly using a common web portaland frequent face-to-face groupmeetings. Longer-term sustainabilitywould be supported by more

12

such as local authorities and theAssociation for Science Education. Itwould be useful to find out how thisexchange works in other countriesand also in other subjects andeducation areas.

4.4.3 Engaging with thevoluntary sectorPartnerships between schools andproviders might be developed morequickly and effectively with the helpof local volunteers. There are a largenumber of ‘amateur experts’, such asthose who contribute to the OpenUniversity’s iSpot scheme, who mightbe available to support fieldwork inschools.

4.4.4 Strengthening andsharing approaches toevaluationBoth formal and informal sectors seekto evaluate young people’s learninggains through fieldwork. For example,informal educators often videopupils’ responses to activities and this

from headteachers/heads ofdepartment; assessment by measuringlaughter, nervousness and otheremotional responses.

4.5 Policy seminar held atKing’s College London

4.5.1 Linking top-down andbottom-up policyCurriculum specifications, officialguidance and framework documentsproduced by awarding bodies, Ofstedand Ofqual should routinely includereference to outdoor learning whereappropriate. Schools and teachersshould be able to adapt suchguidance to appropriate localexamples and circumstances.

4.5.2 Developing wholeschool policiesWhole-school policies related to out-of-classroom learning need to bedeveloped and supported byheadteachers and governors.

4.5.3 Learning from other agephasesInitiatives such as Eco-schools,Healthy Schools, Sustainable Schoolsand the effective use of outdoorspace have all been adopted moreenthusiastically by early years andprimary education than by secondaryschools. Secondary schools can learnfrom work done in early years andprimary education to developoutdoor learning. The use ofinitiatives such as collapsedtimetables may ease the constraintswhich have curtailed the uptake offieldwork in 11+ education.

4.5.4 Identifying supportersThere is a need to identify a well-known personality or ‘brand’ (forexample, the BBC) to raise the profileof fieldwork and to endorsesupportive policies.

Outdoor Science • Issues emerging from the seminars

methodology could be applied inschools. In exchange, the informalsector could learn more aboutassessment and measuring theprogress of children from the schoolsector. There should also be a moreformal evaluation of the full range ofbenefits from outdoor learning, whichcould be shared across both sectors.

4.4.5 Building and sharing theresearch and evidence baseResearch findings are frequentlycomplex and available in a fragmentedmanner. Busy teachers need to accessresearch findings which are ‘joined-up’and in a comprehensible format.They need real evidence of the valueof outdoor activities. Both formal andinformal educators need research intoquestions such as: how do creativeapproaches (for example, storytellingand performance) enhance learningand enjoyment in science; whetherfield visits near school are just as goodas those further afield; if the learningvalue of seeing things in situ is differentto that in museums; and, how childrenperceive local features comparedwith more distant ‘exotic’ ones.

4.4.6 Transferring goodpractice from formal toinformal educatorsInformal educators could learn fromthe same initiatives which formaleducators have found successfulwithin the school environment, forexample: cross-curricula workthrough integrated planning (especiallyscience, mathematics and geography);cross-subject linking during teachertraining; problem-solving activities;removing extreme health and safetybarriers; a commitment todemonstrating the relevance oflearning; an emphasis on developingteam-work; smoother transitionsbetween primary and secondaryschooling; off-curriculum days forteachers to explore resources; support

13

5 AcknowledgementsASE’s Outdoor Science Working Group is grateful tothe Nuffield Foundation for recognising theimportance of science fieldwork and for funding theseminars and follow-up consultation events leading tothis report and recommendations.

Members of the ASE Outdoor Science Working GroupMs Marianne Cutler, Association for Science Education

Ms Karen Devine, British Ecological Society

Professor Justin Dillon, King’s College London

Ms Melissa Glackin, King’s College London

Dr Marcus Grace, Southampton University

Professor Chris King, Keele University

Mr Roger Lock, University of Birmingham

Ms Ginny Page, Science and Plants for Schools

Dr Stephen Tilling, Field Studies Council

Host institutions for seminarsCambridge University Botanic Garden

King’s College London

National Science Learning Centre

Science Learning Centre South West

University of Birmingham

Participants at the seminars and follow-up consultation eventsIan Abrahams, University of York

Jeremy Airey, National Science Learning Centre

Ruth Amos, Institute of Education

Ian Bailey, Southampton Urban Study Centre

Hannah Baker,Wellcome Trust

Derek Bell,Wellcome Trust

Brian Berry, Science Learning Centre South West

John Booth, Science Adviser (Birmingham LA)

Peter Borrows, Association for Science Education/Chemistry Trails

Paul Bowers-Isaacson, Curriculum Developer and Assessor

Martin Braund, University of York

Sharon Brett, Cawston VC Primary School

Heather Brown, Forest Schools

Dave Burchett, Learning through Landscapes

Phil Burfield, RSPB

Liz Burgin, The Association of Tutors in Science Education,University of Winchester

Jean Cade, Cambridge Partnership GTP

Fiona Charnley, Institute of Energy and SustainableDevelopment, De Montfort University

Jacky Chave, Royal Horticultural Society

Hannah Cheek, Calshot Activities Centre, Hampshire

Lorrainne Coghill, NETPark Science

Nikki Edwards, OCR

Eddie Ellis, University of Middlesex

Nigel Flynn, Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts

Mo Follis, STEMworks

Stephanie Forman,Wellcome Trust

Katherine Forssey, The Arboretum Trust

Richard Fosbery, University of Cambridge InternationalExaminations

Lorna Fox, London Wildlife Trust

Alan Goodwin, The Association of Tutors in Science Education

Beth Grainger, LSN Learning

Mary Griffin, Qualifications and Curriculum DevelopmentAgency

Janice Griffiths, Science Learning Centre South East

Kirstie Hampson, Association for Science Education

Christine Harrison, King's College London

Anne Helme, The Royal Society

Kevin Henderson, Council for the Curriculum, Examinationsand Assessment, Northern Ireland

Lynn Henfield, National Strategies

Maria Hogan, Science Learning Centre London

Steven Horsley, Council for Learning Outside the Classroom

Leszek Iwaskow, Ofsted

Mary Jackson, Learning through Landscapes

Liz Jeavans, The Royal Society

Sue Johnson, Institute of Education

Beth Jones, Field Studies Council

Anjana Khatwa, Jurassic Coast World Heritage site

Judi Lakin, Geological Society

Liz Lakin, University of Cumbria

Andy Lee, Natural History Museum

Carol Levick, Nuffield Foundation

Jenny Lewis, University of Leeds

Liz Lister, British Science Association

Dean Madden, University of Reading

Chas Matthews, National Association of Field Studies Officers

Tim McGregor, FACE (Farming and Countryside Education)

Fiona Miller, SCORE

Jo Moules, National Advisers and Inspectors Group for Science

Richard Needham, National Science Learning Centre

Christine Newton, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

Danny Nicholson, The Association of Tutors in Science Education

Robbie Nicol, University of Edinburgh

Stuart Nundy, Hampshire LA

Donald O’Donnell, Open University

Jane Pagan, The Association of Tutors in Science Education

Joy Parvin, National Science Learning Centre

Kalpna Patel, The High Arcal School, Dudley

Rob Percival, Qualifications and Curriculum DevelopmentAgency

Henricus Peters, National Association for EnvironmentalEducation

Mary Philpott, CLEAPSS

14

6 ReferencesBarker, S., Slingsby, D. and Tilling, S. (2002). Teaching BiologyOutside the Classroom: is it Heading for Extinction? A Reporton Biology Fieldwork in the 14-19 Curriculum (FSC OccasionalPublication 72). Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.

Department for Education (DfE) (2010). The Importance ofTeaching – The Schools White Paper 2010. London: DfE.

Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2006). LearningOutside the Classroom Manifesto. London: DfES.

Dierking, L.D., Falk, J.H., Rennie, L., Anderson, D. andEllenbogen, K. (2003). Policy statement of the ‘InformalScience Education’ Ad hoc Committee. Journal of Research inScience Teaching, 40, 108-111.

Dillon, J. (2010). Beyond Barriers to Learning Outside theClassroom in Natural Environments. Reading: Natural England.

Fisher, A. (2001). The demise of fieldwork as an integral part ofscience education in UK schools. Pedagogy, Culture andSociety, 9(1): 75-96.

Glackin, M. (2007). Using urban green space to teach science.School Science Review, 89(327), 29-36.

House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee(2010). Transforming Education Outside the Classroom. Sixthreport of session 2009-10. London: The Stationery Office.

House of Commons, Education and Skills Committee (2005).Education Outside the Classroom. Second Report of Session2004–05. Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral andWritten Evidence (HC 120). London: The Stationery Office.

Kendall, S., Murfield, J., Dillon, J. and Wilkin, A. (2006).Education Outside the Classroom: Research to Identify whatTraining is Offered by Initial Teacher Training Institutions, DfESResearch Report 802. London: DfES.

O’Donnell, L., Morris, M. and Wilson, R. (2006). EducationOutside the Classroom: an Assessment of Activity and Practicein Schools and Local Authorities, DfES Research Report 803.London: DfES.

Ofsted (2010). Science Survey Visits. Generic Grade Descriptorsand Supplementary Subject-Specific Guidance for Inspectorson Making Judgements During Visits to Schools. London:Ofsted.

Rickinson, M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.Y.,Sanders D. and Benefield, P. (2004). A Review of Research onOutdoor Learning. Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.

Tilling, S. (2004). Fieldwork in UK secondary schools: influencesand provision. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 54-58.

Tilling, S. and Dillon, J. (2007). Initial Teacher Education and theOutdoor Classroom: Standards for the Future. Shrewsbury:ASE and FSC.

Wellcome Trust (2003). Life Study: Biology A level in the 21stCentury. London: Wellcome Trust.

Citation for this reportAssociation for Science Education Outdoor Science WorkingGroup (ASE OSWG) (2011). Outdoor Science. Shrewsbury: FieldStudies Council and King’s College London.

Outdoor Science • Acknowledgements and References

Adrian Pickles, Field Studies Council

Sally Preston, Science Learning Centre North East

Patricia Quinn, Council for the Curriculum, Examinations andAssessment, Northern Ireland

Andrew Raistrick,Woodrush Community High School,Birmingham

Michael Reiss, Institute of Education

Kay Roberts, Research Councils UK

Ros Roberts, University of Durham

Marie Rolfe, Holton St Peter CP School, Suffolk

Daniel Sandford-Smith, Gatsby Technical Education Projects

Jean Scrase, Gatsby Technical Education Projects

Rob Senior, Bradford College

David Slingsby, Journal of Biological Education

Mark Smith, The Grammar School at Leeds

Peter Smith, National Association of Field Studies Officers

Marine Soichot, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris

Nicky Souter, University of Strathclyde

Trish Stevens, George Salter Collegiate Academy, WestBromwich

Jane Still, Consultant

Clare Thomson, Institute of Physics

Andrew Treharne, Arnold School, Blackpool

Claire Williams, OCR

Mark Winterbottom, University of Cambridge

Emily Yeomans,Wellcome Trust

15

Photographs: Peter Boardman, Justin Dillon, Earth Science Teachers’Association, Field Studies Council, Ian Galloway, Melissa Glackin, OlympicPark Legacy Company.

The study of biology, geology and the rest is a living experience, and without fieldwork it can be (and often is) killed stone dead

Published for the ASE’s Outdoor Science Working Group by Field Studies Council and King’s College London

OP144. ISBN 978 1 85153 283 4

© ASE Outdoor Science Working Group 2011

“

”