Guidance, ideas and examples to support schools in developing their curriculum, pedagogy, enrichment and support for more able learners, within a whole-school context of cognitively challenging learning for all. Includes ideas to support curriculum development, and practical examples, resources and ideas to try in the classroom. Popular topics include: curriculum development, enrichment, independent learning, questioning, oracy, resilience, aspirations, assessment, feedback, metacognition, and critical thinking.
NACE Education Adviser Hilary Lowe explores the challenges of “lockdown learning”, how schools are responding, and what lessons could be learned to improve provision for all young people both now and in the years to come.
We have been submerged with COVID-19 stories. But very few of those have told the tale of what is happening to thousands of young people whose lives have been disrupted and delayed or of their teachers who have been keeping calm and carrying on, often going to extraordinary lengths to try to ensure continuity and quality in those young people’s education.
NACE too has been trying to run business as usual wherever possible, working with members and colleagues to find creative and innovative ways of serving the school community in immediate practical ways. We have also been planning for possible future scenarios in the way we work with schools and others involved in supporting the education of highly able young people. We know that things may never be quite the same again. We could even go so far as to hazard that many of the changes we are seeing in the way schools and national organisations are supporting young learners in lockdown are heralding a new age in education.
Could this be the watershed in the paradox of a pandemic that has shut down many forms of normal life which will usher in some of the radical changes pundits are predicting might emerge in other areas of social and economic activity? Could this be the time we move from what is still in many ways the Victorian order of schooling to a new order for the 21st century? An order which connects the best of what we know about how we learn and what we need materially to learn – and how we teach, with the benefits of technology and informed by the needs of society and the individual in the uncertain years to come.
Facing up to the cracks and gaps in the current system
It has been both fascinating and humbling to hear how NACE member schools have moved with great alacrity from largely classroom-based learning to providing schooling, including pastoral support, from a distance. This has often been – although not of course exclusively – from a low base of technological skills and hardware and little training in designing distance learning.
We know with even greater certainty than we did before that young people’s home environments are not always conducive to good learning. We also know that millions of young people do not have access to the technology and basic resources which could support their learning and wellbeing at a distance. The deep cracks in social and economic equity are becoming even more obvious to teachers whose profession at its noblest aims to develop young people to aspire to be the best that they can be. Recent reports from the Sutton Trust, amongst others, attest to the ongoing deep social divisions with which we are already familiar and to the emerging impacts of the pandemic learning lockdown on young people, not only on their achievement but also on their aspirations (Sutton Trust, 2020).
Acknowledging the stark picture painted by the Sutton Trust research on pupil engagement and the capacity of schools to deliver distance learning, we know through contact with our member schools and through our two recent online member meetups that there are both state schools and independent schools making things work despite the odds. NACE has been privileged to be able to gather a wealth of knowledge about both what is working well in supporting learning at home and what is proving most challenging.
Challenges and concerns
Lack of engagement from learners and parents
Lack of technologies and resources at home
Marking and feedback
Accelerating and monitoring progress for all learners
Learner choices and future decisions e.g. options, post-16, post-18
Future behaviours and engagement when back in school
Growing ‘disadvantage gaps’ and how to manage/remediate
Supporting learners with additional, particular needs e.g. SEND
More able learners who are socially disadvantaged
More able learners affected by the pressure they put on themselves or excessive pressure from parents
Transitions and transition points e.g. Years 6 and 13
Negative effects on mental health and wellbeing
Realities of what can be achieved at home
Teacher capacity and skills
What’s working?
Clear, consistent cross-school strategy regarding distance learning and learner contact
Systematic approaches with checks and monitoring
Making expectations clear to learners and parents (e.g. parental guidance and communication apps)
Different models according to need, age, experience of online learning, populations, access to technology and resources e.g. some schools delivering a “normal” timetable of lessons virtually; some providing a mix of timetabled lessons, extended projects, suggested downtime activities; some schools delivering individualised learning packs to pupils’ homes
Many schools favour a mix of online and offline learning
Some schools are trying to tailor provision to individual needs e.g. more able learners having access to appropriately challenging resources, guest speakers, debates and projects which involve higher level skills and knowledge
Some schools are prioritising language development and reading as a priority
In the best of cases schools plan home learning according to best practice in effective learning and effective distance learning e.g. retrieval/recall, use/application, new learning etc; judicious use of what can be learned without too much scaffolding; sometimes readjusting planned schemes and schedules of work; allotting “transition time” for catch-up and individual support
Some schools are trying to connect current distance learning to future work to be undertaken when school restarts
Emphasis on motivation and keeping learners engaged e.g. feedback, praise and rewards, competitions
Emphasis on supporting wellbeing and mental health
Regular contact via email/text and phone e.g. once a week and sometimes once a day for more vulnerable groups
Platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom and Google Classroom enable greater participation and interaction, peer-to-peer and peer-to-teacher
For more insights into how schools are responding to current challenges, watch the recordings of our recent virtual member meetups:
Secondary session (28 April 2020)
Primary session (29 April 2020)
What lasting improvements will be made?
In addition to considering how the many and significant challenges will be addressed, it is interesting to speculate on what will be taken forward from all the excellent practice we have seen being developed. Even more interesting might be to speculate on the more radical consequences of the current period on how we teach and learn in future, not only to be ready for further periods of uncertainty but perhaps because we have glimpsed and exercised approaches that might simply allow to do things better for all our young people. Perhaps we have also glimpsed ways in which we as educators would prefer to approach our profession, learning and development.
To conclude then, here are a few future schooling scenarios. Some are more readily doable and could in the short-term help to mitigate the educational damage currently being wrought. Some will require more radical changes in thinking and resourcing at a national level. It is encouraging that we are seeing in this country at least a recognition of and the opening of a debate about how to alleviate some of the collateral damage produced by the present schooling situation and the educational inequalities it is making more visible.
Future scenarios:
Every child in school ensured access to appropriate education technology (basic internet access in every home with school-aged children?)
Schools open longer as “learning hubs”, equipped and resourced to support children’s and parents’ learning and wellbeing
Priority given to developing parental and community engagement
School structures and timetables to allow greater tailoring of learning and greater personalisation e.g. through mixed-mode learning, time for one-to-one, consolidation etc
A major focus in all schools on high-level language development, reading and cultural capital
Emphasis on development of metacognition, independent learning and study skills
Planned opportunities for all learners, including the more able, to learn and be assessed at appropriate levels and points in their learning
School staff trained in designing online learning and assessment in conjunction with evidence-based classroom pedagogies
Greater use of technology for professional dialogue, planning and CPD
As well as responding to the current situation through increased online CPD, resources and guidance, NACE is planning additional ways to support schools and more able learners in the medium- and long-term. As always, this will include listening to what members are telling us about what they need, encouraging more schools to join the NACE community, and making our voice heard at policy levels and with partner organisations to ensure that learners, including the most able, are at the heart of any educational change and improvement.
What would be most useful for you and your school this term? Complete this short survey to help shape our response.
Posted By Matthew Williams,
15 April 2019
Updated: 07 August 2019
What are Oxbridge admissions tutors really trying to assess during the famously gruelling interview process? Dr Matt Williams, Access Fellow at Jesus College Oxford, shares “four Cs” used to gauge candidates’ suitability for a much sought-after place.
Oxbridge interviews have taken on near-mythic status as painful reckonings. The way they are sometimes described, a trial by ordeal sounds more appealing.
I used to think as much, before I became an interviewer at Oxford. I’ve worked on politics admissions for several colleges for years now. And “work” truly is the verb here. Admissions tutors and officers at Oxford and Cambridge work very hard over months to ensure they choose the best applicants, and do so fairly. It’s honestly heartening to see how committed tutors are.
It is not even remotely in our interests to put candidates under emotional strain. So a mythic sense of interviews as tests of psychological resilience is nonsense. At Oxford and Cambridge we invite prospective students to come and stay in our colleges, eat in our dining halls and chat with our students and staff. As you’d hope from any professional job interview, the process is friendly, transparent and focused on encouraging the best performances from candidates. Below I’ve outlined a few concrete ideas as to what we are looking for, and how students can prepare.
In the interviews we tend to scribble down notes as the candidate is talking. But what exactly are we recording? What makes for good, mediocre and bad performances at interview? I record lots of data during interviews, which can be collated under four Cs. These help us gauge, accurately, a candidate’s academic ability and potential. This ultimately, is all we are testing at interview…
1. Communication
Candidates do not need to be self-confident and comfortable in expressing their ideas. Our successful candidates are mostly just normal people, with the sort of self-effacing humility you’d expect from a randomly selected stranger. As such, candidates should not be put off by cock-of-the-walk types who seem instantly at ease in our ancient surroundings.
We are not judging candidates by their ease of manner, but we do judge candidates by their ability to communicate. Meaning that candidates need to be able and willing to share their thinking as clearly as possible. Even if a candidate nervously glances at the floor and speaks softly, provided they answer our questions and help us understand their views they will be performing well.
More specifically, we are seeking answers to the questions we pose. There may not be a single answer, but it is not terribly helpful if students try to wriggle out of responding to us. As an example, the following question doesn’t have one correct (or even any correct) response:
“Can animals be said to have rights?”
Candidates need to avoid the temptation of saying either that the question is unanswerable, or sitting on the fence. Such responses are, to be blunt, intellectually lazy. We commonly have candidates “challenging the terms of the question” and thereby not answering the question at all. That is easy. Anyone can do that. Far harder is sticking your neck out and offering a solution, however tentative, to a very complex puzzle.
That said, we’re not expecting candidates to alight on their preferred solution immediately. So candidates should “show their working” and talk through their ideas as they coalesce into a solution. They can challenge aspects of the question and enquire about the wording. It may take the whole interview to come up with an answer, but at least an answer of sorts is being proposed.
2. Critical thinking
The question as to whether animals have rights is contestable. We will challenge any answer a candidate offers to see how they can defend their position. We are not expecting the candidate to drop their resolve and agree with us, but nor should they cohere rigidly to their position if it is clearly flawed. The important point is that candidates are open-minded to the possibility of other, perhaps better, solutions to the puzzle at hand, and a willingness to critique their own thinking.
Often candidates feel that they have done badly when they face critical questioning. Far from it. This is normal and reflects the fact that they have answered the question and given us (the interviewers) something to explore further.
3 and 4. Coherence and Creativity in argumentation
When posing critical questions we may encourage the candidate to identify incoherences in their case. Let’s say they argue that dogs have rights, but racing hounds do not. This could be a category error and we might ask whether they meant to say that all dogs except racing hounds have rights, or if they have made a critical misstep in the case.
Again, having a point of incoherence identified is not a bad sign. What matters is how the candidate responds. If they fail to recognise or resolve a true incoherence, that could suggest an inability to self-critically evaluate an argument.
Creativity, meanwhile, is something of an X-factor. We’re not expecting utterly original thinking in response to our intractable intellectual puzzles. But we do appreciate a willingness not to simply parrot ideas from A-level, or from the press. We appreciate a nascent (but not fully formed) capacity in a candidate to stand on their own intellectual feet.
This is where candidates can (but don’t have to) draw on wider reading or other academic experiences they have had. A lot of candidates are keen to show off what they know, but we’re testing how they think. So, we don’t want long quotes from highfalutin sources, per se; we want the candidates to come up with their own ideas, even if those ideas are half-formed and tentatively expressed.
The bottom line is that we are not looking for perfection, or else there would be little point in seeking to educate the candidates. We’re looking for potential, and it is often raw potential. Therefore willingness, motivation and enthusiasm all play a big part in the four Cs as well.
Posted By Beth Hawkins,
08 February 2019
Updated: 08 April 2019
Do the young people in your school feel confident engaging with scientific concepts, terminology, experiences and thinking? Do they believe science is “for them”? In this blog post, Science Museum Group (SMG) Academy Manager Beth Hawkins shares five ways teachers can help learners develop “science capital” – promoting more positive perceptions of, attitudes towards and aspirations within the sciences.
To read more about the research behind these recommendations, click here.
1. Personalise and localise your content
The more we can relate science content to what matters in learners’ lives and local communities, the more we can create “light bulb moments” where they can see the personal relevance and feel closer to the topic. This is more than contextualising science through world events or generic examples; it is about taking some time to find out about the current interests and hobbies of the individual learners in your classroom. This might include discussing how forces link to a local fair or a football match, or how understanding the properties of materials or chemical reactions can help when baking or cooking at home.
2. Show how many doors science can open
Many young people see science as a subject that only leads to jobs “doing science” – working alone in a laboratory or in a medical field. Yet from fashion and beauty to sports and entertainment, business or the military, nearly all industries use science knowledge and skills. Demonstrate that science can open doors to any future career, to help young people see the value and benefit of science to their future.
For ideas and guidance on linking learning to the world of work, log in to the NACE members’ site for the NACE Essentials guide to CEIAG for more able learners.
3. Widen perceptions about who does science
Science seems to have a bit of an image problem. If you search online for images of scientists, your screen will be filled with hundreds of images of weird-looking men with wild hair, wearing white lab coats and holding test tubes or something similar. Scientists are often portrayed similarly in the popular culture that children are exposed to every day – it is no wonder many young people find it hard to relate. Take every opportunity to show the diversity of people who use science in their work or daily lives so that learners can see “people like me” are involved in science and it isn’t such an exclusive (or eccentric) pursuit.
4. Maximise experiences across the whole learning landscape
Young people experience and learn science in many different places – at school, at home and in their everyday life. No single place or experience can build a person’s science capital, but by connecting or extending learning experiences across these different spaces, we can broaden learners’ ideas about what science is and open their eyes to the wonders of STEM. Link out-of-school visits and activities back to content covered in the classroom. You could also set small related challenges or questions for learners to investigate at home or in their local area.
5. Engage families and communities
Our research has found that many families see science as simply a subject learned in school, not recognising where and how it relates to skills and knowledge they use every day. All too often we hear parents saying, “I am not a science-y person”, “I was terrible at science in school” or even “You must be such a boffin if you are good at science.” When young people hear those close to them saying such things, it is not surprising that a negative perception of science can start to grow and the feeling “this is not for me” set in.
Encourage learners to pursue science-related activities that involve members of their family at home or in their local community. Model and encourage discussions which link science to young people’s interests – this will help to show the relevance of science and normalise it. For specific ideas, check out The Science Museum’s free learning resources.
Beth Hawkins is the Science Museum Group (SMG) Academy Manager. She has been working in formal and informal science education for over 22 years, including roles as head of science in two London schools. Since joining the Science Museum, she has developed and delivered training to teachers and STEM professionals nationally and internationally, and led many of the SMG’s learning research to practice projects. The Science Museum Group Academy offers inspirational research-informed science engagement training and resources for teachers, museum and STEM professionals, and others involved in STEM communication and learning.
Posted By Beth Hawkins,
08 February 2019
Updated: 08 April 2019
You’ve probably heard of cultural capital, but what about science capital? In this blog post, Science Museum Group (SMG) Academy Manager Beth Hawkins outlines recent research on young people’s engagement with and attitudes to science – and how understanding this can help schools increase take-up of STEM education and career paths.
At the Science Museum, engaging people from all backgrounds with science, engineering, technology and maths is at the heart of what we do. Over the past six years, we’ve been working with academic researchers on a project called Enterprising Science, using the concept of science capital to better understand how young people from all backgrounds engage with science and how engagement can be increased through different science-related experiences.
Recent research conducted by University College London with over 40,000 young people across the UK found that while many find science interesting, few are choosing to study science post-16, or consider pursuing a career in science. This is because they struggle to see that science is “for them” or relevant to their lives.
Why should we care?
In one way or another, science is continually changing and improving the way we live. It makes and sustains our society and will help us understand and solve the big questions our world faces. It is a creative and imaginative human endeavour, a way of thinking, asking questions and observing the world around us.
As such, science can open doors and can be invaluable in almost any job, across any sector. It is predicted that by 2030 the UK will have over 7 million jobs that need STEM skills, and it has been recognised that science can help broaden young people’s life choices and opportunities by keeping their future options open, especially among lower socioeconomic groups.
What is “science capital”?
Science capital is a measure of your attitude to and relationship with science. It is not just about how much science you “know”; it also considers how much you value science and whether you feel it is “for you” and connected to your life.
Imagine a bag or holdall that carries all the science-related experiences you have had. This includes what you have learned about science; all the different STEM-related activities you have done, such as watching science TV programmes or visiting science museums; all the people you know who use and talk about science; and whether science is something you enjoy and feel confident about.
How can science capital research be used?
At the Science Museum, we’ve been using science capital research to reflect on how we develop and shape our learning programmes and resources for schools and families. The research also underpins the training we deliver for teacher and science professionals through our new Academy.
Beth Hawkins is the Science Museum Group (SMG) Academy Manager. She has been working in formal and informal science education for over 22 years, including roles as head of science in two London schools. Since joining the Science Museum, she has developed and delivered training to teachers and STEM professionals nationally and internationally, and led many of the SMG’s learning research to practice projects. The Science Museum Group Academy offers inspirational research-informed science engagement training and resources for teachers, museum and STEM professionals, and others involved in STEM communication and learning.
Posted By Alex Pryce, Oxplore,
30 November 2018
Updated: 08 April 2019
Looking for ideas to challenge your more able learners in the humanities? In this blog post, Dr Alex Pryce selects four “Big Questions” from the University of Oxford’s Oxplore project that will spark debate, relate the humanities to the modern world, and encourage independence of mind…
Oxplore is an innovative digital outreach portal from the University of Oxford. As the “Home of Big Questions”, it aims to engage 11- to 18-year-olds with debates and ideas that go beyond what is covered in the classroom. Tackling complex ideas across a wide range of subjects and drawing on the latest research undertaken at Oxford, Oxplore aims to raise aspirations and stimulate intellectual curiosity.
Our “Big Questions” reflect the kind of thinking students undertake at universities like Oxford. Each question is accompanied by supporting resources – including videos; quiz questions; possible answers, explanations and areas for investigation; and suggestions from Oxford faculty members and current undergraduates.
The following four questions touch on subjects as diverse as history, philosophy, literature, linguistics and psychology. They are daring, provocative and rooted in current issues. Teachers can use them to engage able learners as the focus for a mini research project, a topic for classroom debate, or the springboard for students to think up Big Questions of their own.
Over 6,000 languages are spoken worldwide… what’s the point? Imagining a world without linguistic difference will encourage learners to think more globally, while examining the benefits of multilingualism will start conversations about culture, nationality and identity. Investigate multilingualism’s benefits and drawbacks, both historically and with reference to today’s world. For additional stimulation, check out the recording of Oxplore’s live event on this Biq Question.
This question challenges students to think more deeply about why they hold their beliefs, who shapes their behaviour and choices, and how this colours their view of the world. It also creates room for able learners to have nuanced discussions about complex topical issues such as political beliefs, sexuality and ethnic identity, but with reference to public figures they care about – so they get the chance to focus the discussion.
Perfect for: demonstrating the present-day relevance of humanities subjects.
A classic foray into historiographical thinking which can be used to debate questions such as… How have the internet, photoshopping and so-called “fake news” affected our grip on the truth? To what extent does the adage that history is written by the winners stand up in the age of social media? How have racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination shaped the history we consume? For more on this question, check out this recorded Oxplore live stream event.
Perfect for: humanising historians and fostering critical thinking.
Explore philosophy, history and the history of art by encouraging learners to think about humanity’s long association with religion and spirituality. Does religion encourage moral behaviour? What about religious extremism? Examine the implications of religious devotion in fields such as power, community and education, and encourage the sensitive exploration of alternative views.
Perfect for: conducting a balanced debate on controversial issues.
Dr Alex Pryce is Oxplore’s Widening Access and Participation Coordinator (Communications and Engagement), leading on marketing and dissemination activities including stakeholder engagement and social media. She has worked in research communications, public engagement and PR for several years through roles in higher education (HE) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). She holds a DPhil in English from the University of Oxford and is a part-time HE tutor.
Posted By Jess Wade,
05 September 2018
Updated: 08 April 2019
Physicist Dr Jess Wade made headlines this summer for her campaign to get a copy of Angela Saini’s book Inferior into every UK school. The campaign aims to help schools break down gender stereotypes, challenging and supporting all young people to develop their abilities in all fields and to choose from a full breadth of career options. In this blog post for the NACE community, Dr Wade explains what motivated her to launch the campaign, and suggests six steps all schools can take to reduce gender bias.
This is a big year: 2018 marks 100 years since (some) women got the vote and 70 years since women could graduate from the University of Cambridge. For completeness: it is almost 200 years since the majority of men could vote and 809 years since they could graduate from Cambridge.
In many ways, we have come a long way since Charles Darwin wrote “the average of mental power in a man must be above that of a woman” in The Descent of Man (1881). But gender bias and stereotypes still impact young people’s self-confidence and subject choices, which is limiting their career opportunities and damaging the UK economy.
Despite boys and girls doing equally well at physics GCSE, girls only make up 22% of the physics A-level cohort (and this is the highest it has been for almost 10 years). The Institute of Physics (IOP) has been researching this for decades. In 2012 it found that more half of state-maintained secondary schools had no girls in their physics A-level classes and in 2013 that schools which had the fewest girls in physics A-level also had the fewest boys in psychology.
The Opening Doors report, published in 2015 by the IOP and the Government Equalities Office, offers teachers guidance and support in their efforts toward gender equality. In 2016, the Improving Gender Balance project recommended whole-school interventions to stop gender inequities in A-level choice, recognising that a school-wide approach is needed to make a difference.
The Inferior campaign
Last year Angela Saini published Inferior: The True Power of Women and the Science that Shows It. The book is a powerful collection of evidence that challenges the notion of differences between men and women. From parallel parking to an innate ability in maths, the science behind stereotypes is often dodgy and experiments are rarely reproducible.
Reading Inferior changed my life. It armed me with the facts to take on even the fiercest of naysayers and inspired me to speak up and fight harder. I’ve been taking it with me ever since – to every conference and every new research lab – and when I see someone impressive speak I give them a copy. Inferior has been so well received by the scientific community that last year Saini did a tour of UK universities, filling lecture theatres with passionate students and academics.
In mid-July I realised we should get Inferior into schools, so I set up a crowdfunding campaign with my friend Dr Claire Murray, hoping to get it into every all-girls state school in the country. We reached that goal in less than 24 hours, so raised the bar even higher: every state school in Britain.
Thanks to Saini’s epic publishers (4th Estate), who agreed to match any funds we raised and manage distribution, it took less than 12 days for 800 people to donate enough money. At some stage over the next academic year, Inferior will be finding its way to your school library. Instead of just telling young people about stereotypes, we want them to read about the science, history, individuals and societies behind such stereotypes for themselves. I want them to get as excited as I am about challenging bias, and as motivated as I am for a fairer future.
6 changes all schools can make now
When you receive your copy of Inferior, I hope you use it as the stimulus for discussion with young people, and to plan activities within and beyond the classroom. A bunch of people who donated to the campaign didn’t want to just stop there; together we are creating a set of resources to help teachers make effective use of Inferior (sign up to help out here).
In the meantime, here are six changes you can make straight away:
1. Stop using sexist and gendered language
Whether it is “we need a couple of strong boys” or “you girls will be good at this creative part”, such sentences stick around in young people’s consciousness and affect their perception of themselves and others.
2. Collect data
Compare your school to national averages and identify areas for concern – then act on them.
3. Build careers guidance into lessons
Make sure it is up-to-date and gender neutral. If you’re keen on using “role models”, plan this carefully; try to make their relationship with the school more long-term and invite parents along. A lot of early-career scientists and engineers hang out on Twitter – find us there!
4. Stop saying subjects are “hard”
Some people find art impossible and some can’t add up the tab at a bar – and that’s ok. Teachers are incredibly influential and their biases can have a profound impact on young people’s perceptions. Instead of characterising certain fields as inherently difficult or referring to natural talent, talk about each individual working to the best of his/her ability.
5. Acknowledge unconscious bias
Teachers need to be aware of how they might inadvertently send gendered views to their students. Schools can support this through formal training, by signposting resources such as online tests designed to highlight unconscious bias, and by establishing a norm of acknowledging and discussing these issues.
6. Don’t try and do it all by yourselves
Get students and parents involved too. Discuss gendered aspirations at parents’ evenings. Get students to read Inferior and discuss ways to change school culture so that it is more equal for everyone.
Finally, remember you are NOT alone. 800 people raised £22,000 in less than two weeks to get Inferior into your classrooms. Read, share, discuss, and make a difference!
Dr Jess Wade is a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Physics and Centre for Plastic Electronics at Imperial College London. She is a member of the WISE Young Women’s Board and the WES Council, founder of Women in Physics at Imperial, and has worked with teachers across the country through the Stimulating Physics Network. Her significant work in public engagement and school outreach has been widely recognised, recently through the Daphne Jackson Medal and Prize. She tweets @jesswade.
Posted By Alex Pryce, Oxplore,
23 April 2018
Updated: 08 April 2019
Looking for ideas to challenge your more able learners in maths? In this blog post, Alex Pryce selects four maths-focused “Big Questions” from Oxplore, an initiative developed by the University of Oxford.
Oxplore is an innovative digital outreach portal from the University of Oxford. As the “Home of Big Questions”, it aims to engage 11- to 18-year-olds with debates and ideas that go beyond what is covered in the classroom. Big Questions tackle complex ideas across a wide range of subjects, drawing on the latest research undertaken at Oxford.
In this blog post, I’ve selected four Big Questions which could offer super-curricular enrichment in different areas of mathematical enquiry. Teachers could ask students to use the questions as the starting point for a mini research project, or challenge them to create their own Big Questions to make practical use of mathematical skills. The questions could also be used to introduce more able mathematicians to fields they could study at university.
Delve into the digits with an exploration of two very different careers. Discover the statistics behind the professions, and debate how difficult these job choices are. We all know that nurses do a fantastic job, but what about footballers who devote their time to charity work? Who should earn more? Get involved in debating labour markets, minimum wage, and the supply and demand process.
Perfect for: budding economists and statisticians.
What does truth really mean? Can we separate what we believe to be true from scientific fact? Discuss what philosophers and religious figures have to say on the matter, and ponder which came first: mathematics or humans? Did we give meaning to mathematics? Has maths always existed? Learn about strategies to check the validity of statistics, “truth” as defined in legal terms, and the importance of treating data with care.
Perfect for: mathematicians with an interest in philosophy or law.
Take a tour through the history of money, debate how much cash you really need to be happy, and consider the Buddhist perspective on this provocative Big Question. Discover the science behind why shopping makes us feel good, and explore where our human needs fit within Maslow’s famous hierarchy.
Perfect for: those interested in economics, sociology and numbers.
How can we avoid bad luck? Where does luck even come from, and are we in control of it? Where does probability come into luck? Delve into the mathematics behind chance and the law of averages and risk, taking a journey through the maths behind Monopoly on the way!
Perfect for: those interested in probability, decision-making and of course, board-game fans!
Alex Pryce is Oxplore’s Widening Access and Participation Coordinator (Communications and Engagement), leading on marketing and dissemination activities including stakeholder engagement and social media. She has worked in research communications, public engagement and PR for several years through roles in higher education (HE) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). She holds a DPhil in English from the University of Oxford and is a part-time HE tutor.
Posted By Alex Pryce, Oxplore,
21 March 2018
Updated: 08 April 2019
Looking for ideas to challenge your more able learners in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)? In this blog post, Alex Pryce selects four “Big Questions” from the University of Oxford’s Oxplore project – providing rich starting points for debate, investigation and independent learning…
Oxplore is an innovative digital outreach portal from the University of Oxford. As the “Home of Big Questions”, it aims to engage 11- to 18-year-olds with debates and ideas that go beyond what is covered in the classroom. Big Questions tackle complex ideas across a wide range of subjects and draw on the latest research undertaken at Oxford. Oxplore aims to realise aspirations, promote broader thinking and stimulate intellectual curiosity.
Our Big Questions reflect the kind of thinking students undertake at universities like Oxford. Each question is accompanied by supporting resources – including videos; quiz questions; possible answers, explanations and areas for investigation; and suggestions from Oxford faculty members.In the classroom, these four STEM-related Big Questions could offer super-curricular enrichment spanning a diverse range of subject areas. Teachers could ask students to design a mini research project on a particular aspect of the question, or extend their learning by challenging them to create Big Questions of their own.
Provoke debate around the Big Bang, chaos, laws of probability, and where explosions fit into this as examples of order and disorder. Students can learn about the history of explosions, and positive examples of the things that wouldn’t exist without them. Delve deeper into the science behind the nuclear bomb and take a closer look at creatures that could survive one.
What does it mean to be a human being? Examine the nature of intelligence, language, creativity and the law with your students. You can debate the role of artificial intelligence within society and explore the boundaries between computers and consciousness – now and in the future.
We all travel forward through time, but what happens if we change how we do this, or the speed in which we travel? Inspire your students to explore special relativity in action – through GPS, electromagnets, and TV and PC screens.
Is it right to interfere with nature? Introduce your students to the science of stem cell research, therapeutic cloning, and create neuroethics debates. Discuss whether humans should be allowed to “design” new animals, and explore the development of cloning: from Hans Spemann’s original 1902 experiment that split a salamander embryo in two, to the first successful human embryos cloned in 2008.
Perfect for: discussions of the weird and wonderful.
Alex Pryce is Oxplore’s Widening Access and Participation Coordinator (Communications and Engagement), leading on marketing and dissemination activities including stakeholder engagement and social media. She has worked in research communications, public engagement and PR for several years through roles in higher education (HE) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). She holds a DPhil in English from the University of Oxford and is a part-time HE tutor.
Blog Home
All Blogs
Print Page
RSS
