Victorian Auditor-General’s report 
6 June 2012 
Science and Mathematics Participation Rates and Initiatives
Audit summary
For decades, many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries have become increasingly concerned about the declining proportion of their students studying science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects. Many Australian research studies have also highlighted a trend away from the study of what are known as the ‘enabling’ sciences—physics, chemistry and advanced mathematics. 
The decline in students pursuing STEM subjects, particularly the enabling sciences, raises concern about the future supply of scientists and engineers, and its potential impact on future research, development and innovation capability. 
Further, all citizens today need scientific and mathematical literacy, which underpins numerous trades and professions, and is needed to understand a range of economic, social and environmental issues.
We assessed whether Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD) initiatives have improved student participation and achievement in science and mathematics by considering whether:
·	the number and proportion of students studying science and mathematics studies in senior secondary and post-secondary school is increasing
·	DEECD has the required workforce to support high-quality teaching in science and mathematics
·	students have access to high-quality science and mathematics facilities and equipment.
Conclusions
DEECD has not succeeded in raising achievement in science and mathematics or participation in the enabling sciences, despite a 2006 Victorian Parliamentary inquiry which found that it needed to lift participation and performance. Three years after the inquiry, DEECD released the science and mathematics education strategy but implementation of various initiatives has been slower than anticipated, and their impact small. DEECD will need to improve its planning, coordination and oversight and develop greater accountability at the school level if science and mathematics participation and achievement are to improve.
While Victoria does reasonably well in getting its students to basic levels of achievement, there is an ongoing issue with the relatively low proportion of high achieving students. The middle years of schooling reveal a persistent and significant drop-off in achievement. Low levels of achievement and student disengagement during the middle years are likely to deter and even preclude students from studying the enabling sciences at senior levels and ultimately pursuing a science or mathematics‑related career. 
Science and mathematics education, and student performance, are also uneven across the state. Non-metropolitan students and students from disadvantaged schools fare much worse in science and mathematics, and fewer take the subjects in the final years of schooling. They also have less access to the best quality teachers, and to programs that support the science and mathematics curriculum.
Teaching quality is the single most important school-based factor influencing student interest and achievement. However, DEECD lacks essential data, has failed to develop a robust workforce strategy, and its teacher recruitment and professional learning initiatives have had little, if any, impact on the quality of science and mathematics teaching and learning. This seriously compromises the future supply of science and mathematics skills and knowledge in the community.
Many schools, particularly in regional and disadvantaged metropolitan areas, experience difficulty in employing suitably qualified science and mathematics teachers. Consequently, significant numbers of students are encountering teachers who are teaching science and mathematics outside their field of expertise during the middle years of schooling, which is the most important time for establishing essential skills and influencing student engagement in these subjects. If not addressed, these workforce issues will have serious consequences for the breadth and quality of science and mathematics education in Victoria in the future. One particular risk is that curriculum offerings could be cut, especially in non-metropolitan and disadvantaged schools.
The quality of science and mathematics classroom infrastructure also affects student interest and teaching strategies, and this varies considerably within and between schools. Additionally, it is too early to judge whether the two main science infrastructure initiatives have improved teaching and learning as both were hindered by construction delays, poor project management and a lack of leadership from DEECD. The immediate challenge is for schools to use the new science infrastructure to implement a contemporary science curriculum, extend strategic partnerships with industry, higher education and specialist facilities, and to engage more students and lift achievement.
Findings
Student participation and achievement in science and mathematics 
Participation by school leavers in post-school science and mathematics education and training remained steady between 2009 and 2010. However, there was a drop in the proportion of students studying engineering-related courses which coincides with critical skill shortages in these areas.
Overall participation in Year 12 science subjects has remained steady since 1995, while participation in Year 12 mathematics has increased. However, participation in the fundamental, enabling sciences has been decreasing over the same period.
Victorian students typically perform at or above national and international averages in science and mathematics, however, student performance is not improving. While about average for mathematics, Victoria’s results in national rankings show that in science, students are lagging behind at the top levels of achievement and are over‑represented at the lowest levels. 
The rate of growth in student performance in science and mathematics falls steadily as they progress through the middle years of schooling, and is strongly influenced by socio-economic and location factors.
Teacher supply and demand
DEECD does not have sufficient evidence to inform its workforce decision-making. It does not have basic data about the number of science and mathematics teachers needed or currently employed. Further, it does not have basic information about the qualifications or experience of science and mathematics teachers currently teaching, or their ongoing training and development needs.
The availability and distribution of science and mathematics teachers continues to be an area of challenge. Schools, regions and other stakeholders report that quality—not quantity—of teachers is their most significant issue. Schools in rural and regional areas and socio-economically disadvantaged areas have the most difficulty attracting good quality science and mathematics teachers.
DEECD’s professional learning initiatives have reached very few teachers. They have not raised standards, particularly among middle school teachers who are responsible for establishing students’ foundation skills and interest in studying science and mathematics at higher levels. 
Access to high-quality science and mathematics infrastructure 
The standard of science laboratories and mathematics classrooms varies within and across schools. 
The Commonwealth Government’s Building the Education Revolution program is supporting science education in 43 disadvantaged secondary schools by building new science laboratories. Although the program had project management difficulties and long delays, schools are generally satisfied with their new facilities. 
DEECD has doubled the number of science specialist centres to six, with the aim of creating an integrated statewide network that engages students and supports teachers. The development of the network has been affected by construction delays and a lack of coherent governance arrangements and business processes, as well as the failure of a commissioned curriculum development project to deliver the required teaching and learning resources.
DEECD achieved 84 per cent of its onsite participation target for the specialist science centre network in 2011. Participation by government school, rural and disadvantaged metropolitan students fell in 2011, compared to 2010.
Performance measures and targets
DEECD did not set appropriate targets or performance measures for the science and mathematics education strategy. None of the five targets are time bound, three are not specific and three cannot be assessed for at least four years. DEECD also has not identified the desirable number of students studying science and mathematics at varying levels to meet industry and community demand for science and mathematics skills.
Recommendations
Number	Recommendation	Page	
	The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development should:		
1.	establish relevant and appropriate performance measures for science and mathematics education, and obtain the necessary data to measure progress and success	19	
2.	complete its workforce data collection framework and collect, maintain, analyse and report on complete, reliable and timely data about science and mathematics teachers, and their qualifications, skills and experience	31	
3.	implement a workforce strategy that supplies more and better quality science and mathematics teachers 	31	
4.	improve the governance and operation of the science specialist centres network to meet the participation targets for priority groups	42	
5.	facilitate and maximise links and partnerships between the science specialist centres, specialist science schools and schools with new science facilities 	42	
6.	develop and deliver a program to improve ICT skills across the science and mathematics teacher workforce to better support them to integrate ICT into the curriculum.	42	
Submissions and comments received
In addition to progressive engagement during the course of the audit, in accordance with section 16(3) of the Audit Act 1994 a copy of this report was provided to the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development with a request for submissions or comments.
Agency views have been considered in reaching our audit conclusions and are represented to the extent relevant and warranted in preparing this report. Their full section 16(3) submissions and comments however, are included in Appendix B.