Development of The Salters-Nuffield Advanced Biology Curriculum (SNAB): the importance of evaluation Jenny Lewis Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education University of Leeds UK

Salters Nuffield Advanced Biology (SNAB) An Advanced Level biology course for students aged Development began in 2000 Piloting began in 2002 (52 schools; ~1500 students) Approved qualification available from 2005

Advanced level courses in England The full A Level is designed for students aged and takes 2 years Each year ends in an exam which leads to a qualification: –Year 1 leads to AS (a ‘stand alone’ qualification) –Year 2 builds on AS and leads to A2 –AS + A2 give the full A level qualification Only some of the students who take AS will go on to take A2 But students cannot normally take A2 if they have not successfully completed AS.

The traditional A level biology course Content is organised around broad subject areas and processes, for example: genes and genetic engineering, microbes and disease. The full concept is usually taught once, to the required depth. Social and ethical issues are often treated as an ‘add on’, if there is time. The approach is teacher led and content driven with an emphasis on factual recall rather than understanding.

The SNAB A level biology course Content is organised around real world contexts, drawing biological content from across traditional areas, supplemented with additional content, to provide an integrated explanation; for example: –a forensic investigation of 2 dead bodies draws on pathology, physiology, immunology and microbiology to determine whether or not there has been a murder. Biological concepts are only taught to the depth required to understand the context; this means that the full concept might be developed across several contexts; for example, meiosis. Relevant social and ethical issues are routinely integrated into the teaching of the context. The focus is on the development of conceptual understanding through the active engagment of students in their own learning; this has an impact on the SNAB approach to practical work. There is a reduction in traditional content – to allow time for a more student centred approach; to make room for more relevant and up-to-date content. There is an extensive range of resources and activities to support this novel approach, mainly ICT based; ICT is integrated across every aspect of the course.

Approach to Evaluation To implement SNAB as intended, teachers had to make substantial changes to their usual classroom practices. To take this into account 2 different approaches to evaluation were used: –A broad approach, drawing data from as many sources and participants as possible; –An in depth approach which looked explicitly at implementation in the classroom.

The broad approach Monitoring of the e-networks (for teachers, for students, for technicians) Queries and questions from individual teachers Group feedback during training workshops and feedback meetings School visits Questionnaires (teachers, students and technicians)

The in-depth evaluation of implementation Sample: 3 centres; 8 teachers Approach: 3 phases; Each teacher was interviewed and observed in each phase; their students and technicicians were interviewed to provide supporting evidence Phase 1: the start of the pilot (baseline data – usual teaching approaches; understandings and expectations of SNAB) Phase 2: at the end of the first year (development of understanding and actual use of SNAB) Phase 3: at the end of the second year (teachers, own perceptions of the changes in practice which they needed to make).

Outcomes: the build up of concepts across contexts Biological concepts are built up across topics and across the the two years Teachers needed to teach the whole of the course before they could see how these concepts were built up and to get a good understanding of the correct breadth and depth needed for each particular context. Without this the teachers tended to over-teach - to provide too much in depth explanation too early in the course Most of these teachers shared the teaching of the course so never got the full picture.

Outcomes: the teachers’ own subject knowledge In a traditional curriculum, related concepts are presented together within topics such as inheritance, biochemistry etc. In SNAB each context required teachers to draw on a wide range of biological concepts, including some which were new to them. Mostly they coped well with this, but when the concepts were very removed from their area of expertise they sometimes felt stressed. ‘we can’t be expected to be all-singing, all-dancing biologists …. I’m a biochemist’

Outcomes: reduction of traditional content To make way for new, topical, content and to allow students time to take more responsibility for their own learning, some traditional content was dropped Some teachers found this very difficult to accept – it offended their sense of what it meant to be a biology teacher: ‘I thought « Oh, they’ll have to know (colour vision)….. How can you teach biology without teaching that? »’ Others found it very helpful: ‘Although there is less content overall, SNAB students are better equiped to find additional information for themselves.’

Outcomes: selection of resources SNAB provided extensive resources, with the expectation that teachers (and students) would select as approrpriate to their needs. Initially, most teachers didn’t know they needed to be selective and tried to use everything. Initial selection of resources was pragmatic based on cost, time and availability. With more experience, teachers began to take more account of educational purpose and to recognise that the way they presented an activity influenced its effectiveness: ‘I think I’ve used the Carbon Cycle sheet much better this year … We got into discussion much more… the first time, I didn’t make enough of the activity, I was in a bit of a rush [and then] I was back to my traditional, on the board, approach’ When teachers couldn’t identify the intended purpose they were reluctant to use the activity: ‘some activities seem to lack a clear educational purpose – they may be fun but they feel like‘add-ons’ and leave you with a sense of ‘so what?’.’

Outcomes: approaches to practical work Traditionally, practical investigations had become routine, with an emphasis on getting the right answer; in SNAB the emphasis was on critiquing the methodology and explaining the results; Initially this was challenging – for teachers, but especially for students, who were unused to having to think about their work in this way. With more experience, teachers developed more effective ways of supporting and encouraging their students: ‘[we don’t waste time on write-ups] students now refer to the details … one line – ‘we’re referring to the method on Sheet X (attached)’ ‘I don’t mark their practicals, I give them feedback – ‘you’ve done this well … next time, think about this question’ Most teachers appreciated this change in approach: ‘it’s great to see them doing individual projects …rather than just jumping through hoops’

Outcomes: the use of ICT SNAB produced an incredible range of ICT resources, particularly to support student learning. Many schools were poorly equipped to support these ‘state of the art’ resources but those that teachers and students could access were extremely well received: ‘the ICT is really, really good … to do something in September, to be revising it in June and to have it on the screen, just as it was in September is amazing!’ ‘I keep saying to them ‘you know, you should be using these for revision … going back through the activities, using them like a resource, just as you would a book’. ‘I know I’ve taught that section [nerve impulse/action potentials] much better than I’ve evertaught it before’ Because ICT was such an integral part of the course, biology teachers found they were treated very favourably when new resources were being allocated, often ending up with excellent resources.

Outcomes: approaches to teaching and learning SNAB requires teachers to change their usual classroom practices, and this presented teachers with some challenges. Discussion:most teachers were unclear about the purposes of discussion and uneasy about enaging with social and ethical issues; there was little recognition of the need to structure a discussion and anxiety about losing control and losing respect when they couldn’t give the ‘right’ answer; many teachers foudn ways to avoid or ‘contain’ these areas of the curriculum ICT: when integrating ICT into whole class teaching, teachers had to re-learn how to manage the class in this new situation. Active Learning: some teachers felt quite threatened by the idea that students should take more responsibility for their own learning; even teachers who explicitly wanted to make this change found it more difficult than they expected:

Trusting that students will take responsibility. Developing monitoring and management strategies to support students. Giving the students time to think things through for themselves. Extending their questioning technique: giving students time to think; encouraging students to explain their answers; asking extension questions; not responding when students say ‘just tell us!’. One teacher described it as a process of evolution, not revolution; 4 years later he felt he had finally evolved!

References Lewis, J. and Scott, A. (2006) The Importance of Evaluation During Curriculum Development: the Salters-Nuffield Advanced Biology (SNAB) experience School Science Review 88 (323) p Lewis, J. (2006) Bringing The Real World Into The Biology Curriculum Journal of Biological Education 40 (3)