1. Comberton Case Study Mark Dawes (Maths) & Euan Willder (Science) mdawes@comberton.cambs.sch.uk ewillder@comberton.cambs.sch.uk

2. What we did Maths – Data Handling Cycle Science – Investigation Cycle

3. The aims of the project:  To understand what to do in an extended investigation  To make links between science and maths  To understand the similarities/differences between the writing requirements for sci/maths  To prepare for the extended (coursework) task the pupils will carry out in Yr 10 in science  To gain more familiarity with the data handling cycle in mathematics  To revise/extend/use scattergraphs  To interpret results and draw conclusions through the lens of science and also of maths

4. The front page

5. Writing for purpose and audience

6. Remember the Year 7 Island project? You designed your own island and produced lots of lovely writing about it. You were marked on how well you adapted your style to suit the purpose and audience for which you were writing. Why is it important to change the way you write according to purpose and audience?

7. PurposeWriting style Encyclopaedia entry Formal, impersonal (3 rd person), factual. Often featuring complex sentences and incorporating data and statistics. Travel Brochure Persuasive: positive adjectives, hyperbole (exaggeration), alliteration, metaphors, similes, use of 2 nd person pronoun (you) and first person plural (we) to involve reader Instructional Writing Clear and concise, avoiding figurative language. Use of imperative verbs (eg. Whisk, stir, add) and time-based connectives. Writing in Maths Writing in Science

8. What problems/issues might arise?

9. Possible issues: Liaison within and between the departments Choosing a task that works for the maths and science depts Briefing colleagues – passing on materials, etc Teachers outside their comfort zones Practicalities (eg timetabling, pupils absent, music lessons, setting in the two subjects) More?

10. Lesson 1 (Maths)

13. LessonLesson content MExplanation of the project, introduction to the task. Video clip? Writing for a purpose (using materials from English Dept). S,SWriting for a purpose in science. Design results table. Collect data. Talk about next steps MRevise the use and interpretation of scattergraphs and lines of best fit MAnalyse the data collected in the science lesson S,SSome analysis Science interpretation of the data and evaluation (reliability/accuracy/precision/improvements to technique and equipment) MUse conclusions from the science writing to help write their maths conclusions. Emphasis on the differences/similarities between the two subjects (using the original cycles) Peer assessment.

14. First science lesson

19. Conclusions

20. Some Thoughts... It would be very useful to be able to evaluate the impact of the project on students. I took the approach of doing this from a student and teacher perspective as part of my Masters Dissertation Did they match? An important question and comparison to make.

21. Research Questions 1.How do selected Year 9 students evaluate the impact on their learning and engagement of a cross-curricular Mathematics and Science project? 2. How do the teachers of Mathematics and Science evaluate the impact on the learning and engagement of selected Year 9 students of a cross-curricular Mathematics and Science project?

22. Literature background Much of the literature agrees that further research in to cross curricular teaching is required, however some already hail the notion, whilst others completely reject it. What we do understand is that schools have very deep disciplinary roots.

23. Data Collection Method Questionnaires to 1 class of 30 students A student questionnaire before the project A student questionnaire after the project Focus Group Interviews – 3 students partook, selected with a spread of end of year levels. A teacher questionnaire – 9 out of 19 teachers responded

24. Results Student and teacher...

25. Student Perspective - Learning What did you Learn? The most common result - the knowledge that a ship will sink faster in salt water than in fresh water Some – identified learning how to analyse, evaluate, conclude and write to a higher level – learnt the similarities and differences between the two disciplines – graph related skills – nothing or very little new

26. What will you use again? Most - graph skills that they used in the project A few – the knowledge of ships sinking faster in fresh water than salt water, whilst others thought they may use things from the project in real life situations. Other responses revealed no significant of recurring themes

27. How are Maths and Science related/different (before and after project)? Some students showed more specification as to what the differences and similarities were between Maths and Science after the project but others showed little or no difference. Students felt they found the experiment easy to understand and predict what was going to happen

28. Student Perspective - Engagement

29. Enjoyment and Interest Students enjoyed the Maths and Science cross curricular project less than if the subjects were treated individually 83% of students found the project reasonably, not very, or not at all interesting. The remainder found the project quite or very interesting.

30. From the Interview... Two students identified that they liked doing the experiment and drawing graphs but the repetitive nature of the experiment was “boring”. All three students say that the project could have been more “relevant” to everyday life and to them Students would rather have a project that they can “really find out what is going on” and one that they “want to find the answer” to. Students identify doing cross curricular work as a “good” thing but not as the mainstay for their education, only as small projects.

31. Teacher Perspective - Learning Science Teachers relate what students learnt from the project to the scientific “write up” of the experimental results. Maths teachers identify that students learnt about how maths and science are linked, with only one teacher saying that students developed skills related to maths

32. Teacher Perspective - Engagement Most Science teachers identified the experiment as engaging and enjoyable, with less student engagement and enjoyment on writing tasks. Two teachers identified the repetitive nature of the experiment as less engaging for students Some Maths teachers identified that the “novelty” factor of the project engaged students but expressed concerns with a lack of challenge for higher ability students. One teacher said students who rarely contribute to class discussion actually did for the project, but those who had not done the experiment were less engaged.

33. Issues with the Results Research was undertaken in a “Science Environment” i.e. By a Science teacher Questionnaires conducted in a science lesson, led by a science teacher Interviews conducted in a science classroom by a science teacher

34. Points to consider Is there a danger of trying to force a cross curricular project, thus making it less impacting than it could be? This is a challenge. Cross curricular projects can become heavy with one discipline – issue of suitability How can we push the high ability students with such projects? The different approach to teaching can be a powerful and engaging tool

35. Recommendations More time invested in exploration of an interdisciplinary theoretical framework – so teachers can discuss and base these discussions from a starting point – aims to improve consistency Students should be encourage to explore where they feel they fit in to an interdisciplinary framework to provide unity in developing interdisciplinary understanding, casting aside our deep disciplinary roots More emphisis on “the point” of doing interdisciplinary work – perhaps examples of jobs/roles where different disciplines are used Calls for identifying students who would benefit most from a cross curricular approach