Alessio Bernardelli
I have been looking at the draft Science Curriculum in England and I will post a series of Mind Maps to show the curriculum visually. I hope this will help people to incorporate the new curriculum (when it becomes live) in their existing schemes of work in a more coherent way. I believe this exercise will also show how coherent the draft curriculum itself is. In fact, a coherent document will be very easy to mind map and for associations to be made, whereas an incoherent document will be something of a nightmare to process in a mind map, as it will be inconsistent and with topics and ideas that have little relations with each other and don’t lead to a consistent understanding of scientific ideas and processes that build on each other. What is your guess? Coherent or incoherent?
You can use the Mind Map below, or download the iMindMap version and edit it from this Biggerplate page.
Alessio's Blog 
Thank you Alessio, this will be really useful.
I really like your idea of trying to mind map the curriculum to find coherence. I will be interested to see the outcome. I think that the curriculum will be a mixture as it includes somethings that don’t really fit, but it isn’t a big departure from the 1999 curriculum, and the statements do seem to match the topic titles.
I am very interested to see what you make of the physics curriculum.
That one will be next, so we should find out pretty soon 😉
You could also try ‘working scientifically’ from a biology, chemistry and physics perspective (lets just leave out earth sciences for the moment …)
[…] Mapping the Science Curriculum – Working Scientifically […]
Shouldn’t accuracy and precision be in measurement?
Probably, but that’s where they were in the proposed NC for Science, so I left them there as this is a map of that document, not of what I would like it to be 😉
That’s what I suspected. I think this demonstrates why this is useful. I’m pretty sure most people wouldn’t put them there.