Ann-Kristin Östlund Farrants. Photo: Margareta Ohné.

Teaching genetics is rewarding. That was the opinion of everyone who attended BIG's seminar for biology teachers on 15 February. In addition to three representatives of BIG and an administrator from the Swedish National Agency for Education, eight biology teachers, in different phases of their professional lives, participated. The purpose of the seminar was to discuss how to teach genetics, which is an important part of the central content of high school biology.

Genetics yesterday and today

BIG's head of department Ann-Kristin Östlund Farrants, who herself teaches future biology teachers, began by illustrating how the subject has developed from classical genetics to today's molecular genetics. The participating teachers could confirm that there has been a huge change in what is covered in genetics in school today compared to ten to twenty years ago. One of the participants testified that it is easy as an old teacher to fall back on what you have taught for a long time because you are so good at it - but much is actually mossy and can be removed! At the same time, the need for continuing education about "the latest" in the subject was highlighted.

Genetics easily becomes abstract and the discussion therefore also touched on how to "laborate" in genetics and make the subject more concrete. Good visual material is needed, preferably interactive, several thought. But drawing slowly on the board can also work, especially if combined with animations from e.g. Youtube. Bioresurs also has links to different sets of data that you can work with further. And for those who have the opportunity, a visit to Vetenskapens hus is of course very rewarding.

The proposal for a new subject plan

A big problem is that the subject of genetics has grown so much. Nothing disappears, the books are getting thicker, the lists of terms are getting longer - what should you focus on? This in and of itself is not unique to genetics, but applies to large parts of biology. Thus, the discussion turned to the Swedish National Agency for Education's proposal for a new subject plan in biology, which was out for consultation at the time of the seminar. The representative of the Swedish National Agency for Education emphasized how important it is that we respond to the referral and present our views, both on what is good in the proposal and what we are critical of.

And of course the seminar participants were critical. Above all, strong criticism was directed at the way the central content has been laid out. According to the proposal, all biology must be taken up at level 1 and then come back at level 2, i.e. "first a little about everything and then a little more about everything". The result can be that the students who only study level 1 gain too shallow knowledge, while those who also study level 2 do not reach any depth. It won't be good for anyone.

The just-mentioned overcrowding also means that you should consider deleting certain parts of the content. But the question of what should be removed in that case is complicated and naturally requires more discussion.

Next seminar

The next seminar for biology teachers will be Wednesday, April 26 at 4:30 p.m. - approx. 6:00 p.m. and will be about the school's teaching of species knowledge.