Join the conversation

According to a recent report on science education in California, more than half of elementary school principals do NOT believe it is likely that a student receives high-quality science instruction at his or her school.

If anything, I would expect principals to be optimistic about the strength of their schools, so this finding really drives home longstanding concerns about the state of elementary science education.

And it makes sense when one looks at teacher responses to the survey. Forty percent of elementary teachers reported spending less than 60 minutes a week on science instruction. Thirteen percent reported spending less than 30 minutes a week on it.

These findings come as not only California stakeholders but the President, governors across the nation and the business community are all stressing the importance of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education to our nation’s economy and future competitiveness.

If everyone recognizes the importance of it, why isn’t science education better?

The survey offers some explanations around a general theme: The conditions to support high-quality elementary science instruction are rarely in place. Elementary teachers are unprepared to teach the subject (only about a third feel very prepared to do so). Fewer than 21% of districts provide science-related professional development for elementary teachers, and over 85% of teachers reported not getting any in the past three years. Schools lack the funds needed for the equipment and supplies necessary for science instruction – 66% of elementary teachers said this was a major or moderate challenge to providing science instruction.

It may all come down to the fact that while political rhetoric supports science education, policy doesn’t prioritize it. Current federal accountability policy has been widely criticized for years for its emphasis on reading and math to the exclusion of science, social studies and other subjects (and in this survey, 81% of teachers cite the emphasis on English and mathematics education as a challenge to science instruction). And in California as elsewhere, state policies were designed to meet federal criteria.

According to the LA Times, California’s tool for measuring school progress in meeting state and federal achievement goals – Academic Performance Index (API) – gives science a weight of just 5.9%. Whittier Daily News points out science is not assessed by standardized tests until 5^th grade, and that while the state provides recommended amounts of time that teachers should spend on language arts and math, it does not for science.

In its story on these findings, the LA Times talked with two Los Angeles Elementary School teachers about the state of elementary science education. Both have cut down on science due to pressures to prepare students for English and math tests. Both said that money for science supplies and professional development has dried up.

These teachers do see some benefits to a strong focus on reading and math, but they question whether the sacrifice of science is worth it. To quote the article:

Smyth noted that the focus on math and reading has reaped its own rewards: the school, in the Harvard Heights neighborhood of largely immigrant families, hit the state’s API target of 800 for the first time this year.

“It’s a moral quandary,” Smyth said. “You see the improvement in math and reading scores but you also know the kids aren’t getting what they should have in other subjects.”

Particularly for communities where access to science education outside the classroom may be lacking, one might wonder whether shortshifting kids on the subject will have longer-term consequences with wider equity implications. The ideal solution: Schools won't have to choose between providing science education and meeting accountability targets.

Education officials in California are rushing to improve the policy environment for science in their state. And as discussions over the reauthorization of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act heat up and politicians debate new accountability structures, we can hope they too work to create a policy environment that supports all schools in providing all students with a rich, well-rounded education.