First just a reminder that Building Bridges should enable all these points
to be picked up in a live debate rather than virtual!

In response to Ben Johnson's points re National Science Week, even though
the evaluation's haven't allowed more in depth analysis of the point re the
utility of the week, the numbers of organisers has continued to grow with
more events and organisers this year than ever.  I know that it is too
simplistic to say that because people continue to organise events they must
see some use in them but there must be some truth in this statement.  I will
pass on your comment to the evaluators so that maybe we can tease this out a
little this year.  

For people's information the stated aims of Science Week are:

To encourage young people, including the most able, to study science,
engineering and technology beyond 16 and ultimately to pursue careers in
these areas

To help everyone including decision makers investors parents and the general
public gain an appreciation of the role that science engineering and
technology play in our understanding of what science, engineering and
technology can and cannot achieve and a feeling for how scientists go about
their work and reach their conclusions

Without an event by event analysis it is hard to say whether events are
achieving this.  The first aim is particularly pertinent in a week where
Ofsted have reported that science gains in primary school are wasted as
pupils move into secondary schools.  With one in ten lessons being
unsatisfactory.  As I say we don't have event by event data but we would
hope that some of the techniques used during science week events could
enhance the curriculum and inspire those who become disenchanted through the
current science curriculum and its implementation.

Just more food for thought!


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%