I fully support your actions in bringing attention to the crisis in science education.  Senior science is now a nightmare, and science teachers are expected to implement an ideologically driven agenda that has no concern for students.

The assessment regime is “over the top.”  English teachers say to us, “we don’t use marks, why should science use them?” What they fail to acknowledge is that they’re assessing processes. Criteria based outcomes may work when looking to see if a student can write an essay; English teachers don’t have exams as well, and neither do they have to assess knowledge in an overt manner.  Science teachers have to write complex exams, as well as giving students assignments, EEIs and ERTs. Principals will actually say to science teachers, “English teachers manage with no marks; what’s the big deal?” The lack of intelligent, reflective thought among school leaders is alarming: comparing apples to oranges is no bother when someone says they’re the same fruit.

Radical change occurs in Qld schools because those in charge don’t have to pay for change – teachers do the preparation for change at home – hence it’s cheap.  If the QSA had to pay for change to occur, they wouldn’t be so eager to implement extremist views.  QSA constantly derides teachers who question them, calling teachers who protest “dinosaurs”.  Are the people on the QSA driving change experts on science?  They don’t consult science faculties at university.

Dinosaurs became extinct because they couldn’t survive in changed circumstances.  Teachers do change; questioning the change doesn’t mean they can’t survive it.  Can the QSA survive the new climate?  That is the question.

Chemistry teacher of almost 30 years.