1. Engaging diverse students with science through a ‘science capital’ approach Professor Louise Archer King’s College London

2. The participation ‘problem’ Lots of time and money has been invested in efforts designed to engage more young people with science But there has been little or no change in participation rates (and in the profile of those who continue with science post-16) Many efforts have sought to make science more ‘fun’ and ‘interesting But our research suggests that a lack of interest in science is not the problem!

3. Aspires/ Aspires2 research Since 2009 the ASPIRES project has undertaken large-scale surveys (31,000+ young people to date), and in-depth tracking of students and their parents (age 10-16) ASPIRES/ ASPIRES2 project: www.kcl.ac.uk/aspireswww.kcl.ac.uk/aspires

4. Most students like science - but few aspire to be scientists

5. What careers do students aspire to?

6. Science capital We developed the concept of science capital to try to help explain these patterns Science capital draws on the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of capital (economic, cultural and social resources) - the more you have of the 'right sort' of capital, the better you are able to 'get on' For us, ‘science capital’ is like a ‘holdall’ containing all the science- related knowledge, attitudes, experiences and resources that you acquire through life

7. Capital – how do you get it? How much, and what sort of, science capital you have will be shaped by home, school and everyday contexts

8. Science capital dimensions 1.Scientific literacy 2.Science-related attitudes, values and dispositions 3.Knowledge about the transferability of science skills 4.Science media consumption 5.Participation in out of school science learning contexts 6.Family science skills, knowledge and qualifications 7.Knowing people in science-related jobs 8.Talking to others about science in everyday life & encouragement

9. How much science capital do people have? National survey of 3,658 11-15 year olds in England: 5% have ‘high’ science capital - more likely to be boys, South Asian and socially advantaged students. 68% have medium levels of science capital. 27% have low science capital

10. Capital – what is it worth? Science capital is not fixed – you can keep acquiring more as you go through life. The value of your science capital depends on context (like financial currency, the ‘exchange rate’ varies with where/ when you are trying to spend it).

11. Why science capital matters Our large scale surveys show that a young person with high science capital is significantly more likely to plan to continue with science after the age of 16 and to see science as being ‘for me’. E.g. half of students with high science capital aspire to study a science at university, compared with 6% of students with low science capital 80% of high SC capital students agree that ‘other people think of me as a science person’, vs. 3% of low SC students

12. Enterprising Science project We are trying to: Build students’ science capital (their understanding of science, their attitudes towards science, their everyday science engagement and their family’s engagement with science) Broaden what counts as ‘science’: Open up more ways that children can be recognised by others (teachers and peers) as being scientific (i.e. valuing more diverse ways of ‘doing science’ and recognising ‘science skills’ from other gender and cultural contexts) Build students’ science identities - support children to see themselves as being scientific, particularly those from under-represented groups – science as not just for the “brainiest”

13. Why try to link science with students’ cultural and home backgrounds? ‘When a child’s worldview is left unvalued and expressionless in an educational setting, what should we expect in terms of engagement, investment and learning from that child?’ (Calabrese Barton et al., 2011, p.5) Evidence: engage socially disadvantaged groups with science by recognising and valuing their cultural knowledges and identities Teachers report that it helps quieter/ lower attaining students to participate more and promotes motivation and understanding. Positive feedback from students

14. How can we link science with students’ backgrounds? Elicit and value students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences as ways to talk / do science Support students to link science content with their home lives E.g. connecting science content with home experiences and expertise (e.g. cooking/ molecules; family skills; pets), use of everyday examples (e.g. calculate home energy costs), students use science for advocacy and to solve ‘real’ problems (e.g. school new build – informing SMT; Water aid), connect and promote home dialogue and habits through home works.

15. Example: Science capital dimensions 2 & 3 1.Scientific literacy 2.Science-related attitudes, values and dispositions 3.Knowledge about the transferability of science skills 4.Science media consumption 5.Participation in out of school science learning contexts 6.Family science skills, knowledge and qualifications 7.Knowing people in science-related jobs 8.Talking to others about science in everyday life

16. Why focus on relevance and transferability? Evidence shows widespread lack of awareness of where science can lead: “There’s no point taking science if I don’t want to be a scientist” “I mean when everybody thinks of Science they pretty much think of oh you’re going to be a scientist or a science teacher.” Students who see science qualifications as transferable are more likely to plan to continue studying (e.g. 14x more likely to intend to study Physics at A-level; 15x times more likely - Biology; 17x more likely -Chemistry).

17. How might we address relevance and transferability in our teaching? Make links between the curriculum and students’ everyday lives – help children to make the connections so that they can see science at home Support children to recognise the science skills in themselves and their family members – even if these are not recognised as such by others (e.g. the science skills in cooking) Link science skills to a wide range of jobs and highlight the ways in which science is used in broad range of careers (measurement, analysis, observation skills)

18. Making a difference… We are currently piloting our approach with 10 teachers in 6 London schools Encouraging findings so far – good for engagement and teacher enthusiasm Fits with Ofsted requirements (SMSC) Specifically, we hope to be able to show a positive difference to student engagement with science through: Higher science capital scores (pre- and post-surveys) among intervention school students compared to comparison schools More positive student feedback (interviews/ discussion groups) Improved student engagement over the course of the year (observation data)

19. What teachers say about the approach “Science capital is about making science less threatening” “When I’ve used a science capital approach with [class] they don’t misbehave, they’re all very engaged and enjoy the discussion. [Class] are an absolute nightmare to teach but every time I’ve done science capital there’s been no behavioural issues” “It’s making me happier, as a teacher” Provides a framework for ‘meaningful’ teaching “KS4 is where you lose the kids from science” (Ms Dennis) “’Is this in the test?’ is the most annoying and hurtful thing you can hear from a student” (Mr Hobbes)

20. What students say “I think it brings everyone together, so everyone has common like knowledge of what we’re talking about, but if we’re, like, I don’t know, as a group, I feel like we work harder” (Y10 girl, bottom set) Girl1:'Cause like it brings everyone together, like, everyone has like something to say, instead of it just being like one or two people that know the answer, it’s more possible for everyone to… Girl 2:Yeah, like we’re all able to, like, interact with each other and talk. (Y10, bottom set girls) “Mr Hobbes is different from other teachers because some other Science teachers, they try to make the lessons boring, so I don’t really understand what they say, but Mr Hobbes has a very different way of teaching, for example, like he makes us watch videos, so we can understand it properly (Y7 middle set boy) “[Teacher] just wants to show us how that works in real life. [..] so like he's also knowing us better by talking about our lives, so we’re getting like a close friendship or family” (Year 7 middle set boy)

21. Applying a science capital lens to your own practice How/ where in your lesson could you address one or more of the different science capital dimensions? What do students bring with them? What opportunities are there to elicit children’s funds of knowledge? How might you value these and link them to the curriculum? What are the messages that children get about what is valued/what counts as ‘being scientific’ in your classroom? Who might find it easier/harder and why?

22. Looking ahead The pilot work is still ongoing (end July 2016, surveys, observations, interviews) Next year – next phase testing with schools in Manchester, York and Bradford Continuing to build understanding, examples of application and evidence base Conceptual challenges – e.g. ‘dark’ funds of knowledge Practical challenges – scaling? Resources A continuing partnership …

23. Project publications – academic Archer, L., Dawson, E. Seakins, A., DeWitt, J., Godec, S. & Whitby, C. (2016/in press) “I’m gonna be a man here”: Performances of masculinity and engagement with science during a school/museum intervention. Journal of the Learning Sciences Archer, L., Dawson, E., Seakins, A. and Wong, B (2016) Disorientating, fun or meaningful? Disadvantaged families’ experiences of a science museum visit. Cultural Studies of Science Education. Published on iFirst, DOI 10.1007/s11422-015-9667-7. Archer, L., Dawson E., DeWitt, J., Seakins, A. and B. Wong (2015) Science capital: a conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending Bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, buff.ly/1LNleLK. Archer, L. Dawson, E., Seakins, A. DeWitt, J. & Wong, B. (2015) Author Response. Science Education 99(6): 1147-1149. King, H., Nomikou, E. Archer, L. & Regan, E. (2015) Teachers’ Understanding and Operationalization of ‘Science Capital’. International Journal of Science Education, 37(18):2987- 3014. Dawson, E., Archer, L., Seakins, A., DeWitt, J. & Godec, S. (under review) Selfies & Science Engagement: Girls Identity Performances in a Science Museum Seakins et al (under review) “You’re the expert”: engaging under-served students with science through performances of expertise on school and family museum visits DeWitt et al (under review) Dimensions of Science Capital: Exploring the potential of the concept of science capital for understanding students’ science participation

24. Videos, summaries, animation 2 minute animation ‘what is science capital?’: buff.ly/1FmfXsibuff.ly/1FmfXsi Science capital made clear: buff.ly/1XerGPE Selection of short talks and research briefs on our website: www.kcl.ac.uk/enterprisingscience www.kcl.ac.uk/enterprisingscience

25. Continue the discussion … ASPIRES/ ASPIRES2 project: www.kcl.ac.uk/aspireswww.kcl.ac.uk/aspires Enterprising Science project: www.kcl.ac.uk/enterprisingsciencewww.kcl.ac.uk/enterprisingscience @ASPIRES2science @enterprisingscience