Case study: Thinking Science

Co-producing curriculum-linked resources builds partnerships, improves science education & makes lasting impact in schools

Project lead

James Ladyman, Thinking Science project, 2016-2024

Aim and approach

Professor Ladyman’s research in the Centre for Science and Philosophy led to the creation of the ‘Thinking Science’ teaching resources. 

Collaborating directly with educators and academy chains to enhance teaching practice (rather than delivering outreach sessions for pupils) has proved a successful and efficient way to incorporate Philosophy of Science research in the curriculum, achieving significant impact from schools’ engagement.

Practical details

The initial 4½ year-long project cost ca. £34.5K.  Between 2016 and 2020 various small internal university grants (including IAA & BILT) funded workshops, design costs and a part-time (0.3 FTE) Project Officer.

Key partnerships

The Cabot Learning Federation (CLF) academy chain’s Head of Science was closely involved in developing and testing the resources.  University of Bristol PGCE Science tutors integrated it into their initial teacher training programme.

Activity and outcomes

The resources were designed in collaboration with Bristol science teachers through knowledge sharing workshops and subsequent classroom testing. 

This input established how current philosophical research could enhance curriculum topics, and what activities would be most practical for teachers.  The iterative process generated a set of thought-provoking questions that easily integrate into lessons. 

The resources were presented at education conferences, promoted by the National STEM Learning Centre, and received an outstanding review in the Association for Science Education’s leading journal.  To date, over 2,000 copies have been distributed and around 400 teachers have benefited from ‘Thinking Science’ training, which is now embedded in Bristol’s Science PGCE course.  

The partnership with CLF led to them entirely redeveloping their science curriculum for all 20 schools, to integrate philosophical thinking into teaching.  The same successful methodology was used to create a set of Information Technology resources about AI & Big Data in 2022.

Support

The project was a close partnership with Public Engagement, with a part-time Project Officer seconded from the team.  They set up collaborations with teachers, schools and PGCE courses; advised on content; developed and delivered training.  Other team members supported evaluation and the production of a high-scoring REF Impact Case Study.

Impact

Teachers report learners are more confident to discuss difficult questions in science and that the philosophical approach helps “students who are often disengaged with science to get involved and understand the topics better.” (CLF Head of KS3 Science). 

Prof. Ladyman says:

The project greatly deepened my understanding of how philosophy of science can be used in education.  It widened my experience as an educator and taught me a lot about working with schools.”

Engaging with teachers to change their practice is an effective way to embed research in the classroom and create long-term impact, particularly when academy chains with multiple schools are involved.  

Three large research grants are now funding the development of resources on Belief & Rationality and Astrophysics & Cosmology, including a new part-time post-doctoral project officer role.

 

Themes

  • Co-production
  • Long-term Impact
  • Schools Engagement

Download a Copy

Download a PDF version of this Case Study to print or share from our Intranet site:

Thinking Science - PE Case Study.pdf

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to CONNECT our monthly newsletter full of public engagement news, training opportunities, funding and inspiring stories.

Follow us on Twitter

Follow @engage_bristol on Twitter for the latest news and events.

Public Engagement Stories

Visit our dedicated Public Engagement Stories website for more examples of activities to inspire and encourage you to become involved in engagement. 

Edit this page