Before the Flame: The Reading Work That Makes Practical Science Possible
The text before the apparatus
A required practical lesson begins long before a Bunsen burner is lit or a microscope is focused. It begins with a sheet of instructions, a risk assessment, a data table, and a set of success criteria. Pupils must read these texts before they can act. They must understand the sequence of steps, identify the hazards, recognise what to record, and know what a good result looks like. In many classrooms, this reading work is treated as preparation rather than as part of the practical itself. It deserves closer attention.
The argument of this article is simple: practical work is not only a manipulation of equipment. It is also a reading event. The texts that surround required practicals carry a substantial cognitive load, and that load is unevenly distributed. Pupils who read confidently can move quickly from instruction to action. Pupils who do not may struggle before they ever touch the apparatus. If we want practical science to be inclusive and scientifically meaningful, we need to teach the reading that makes it possible.
What pupils actually read in a practical lesson
Consider a typical GCSE required practical. The method may be presented as a numbered list: measure 25 cm³ of sodium thiosulfate solution, add 5 cm³ of hydrochloric acid, start the timer, record the time taken for the cross to disappear. Even this short sequence contains implicit demands. Pupils must understand imperative verbs, recognise quantities and units, follow chronological order, and hold several steps in mind while carrying them out. They must also understand why the cross disappears, which requires them to connect the procedure to the underlying reaction.
The risk assessment adds another layer. It may say: if acid contacts skin, rinse immediately with plenty of water. This is a conditional sentence. It contains a hazard, an action, and a time condition. Pupils who read it as a general statement rather than a conditional instruction may not know what to do in the event of a spill. The language of safety is often compressed, and compression can be dangerous when it is misread.
Data tables bring further demands. Pupils must read headings, units, and the relationship between rows and columns. They must distinguish independent and dependent variables, and they must understand what counts as a sensible entry. A table heading such as time for cross to disappear / s is compact. It assumes that the pupil knows what the cross is, what disappearance means in this context, and why the unit is seconds. The table is not just a place to write results. It is a text that encodes the logic of the investigation.
Success criteria introduce another kind of reading. Statements such as record observations to an appropriate precision or use appropriate apparatus to make measurements are abstract. They require pupils to interpret what appropriate means in the context of the practical. For an expert, this is obvious. For a novice, it may be invisible.
Why this is an inclusion issue
Practical work is often presented as a way to engage pupils who find written science difficult. There is truth in this. Handling equipment can make abstract ideas concrete. But the claim only holds if pupils can access the texts that frame the practical. If a pupil cannot decode the method, the risk assessment, or the data table, the practical may become a source of anxiety rather than engagement.
The reading demands of practical work are particularly significant for pupils with English as an additional language, pupils with literacy difficulties, and pupils who have missed prior practical experience. These pupils are not lacking scientific curiosity. They are facing a text-heavy task with limited support. The problem is compounded when teachers assume that practical work is inherently accessible because it is active.
There is also a scientific argument, not only an inclusion argument. A pupil who follows a method without understanding its sequence may produce data without knowing what the data mean. A pupil who reads a risk assessment without understanding its conditionals may be less safe. A pupil who reads a data table without understanding its headings may record values in the wrong place. Reading is not an add-on to practical competence. It is part of it.
Teaching the texts explicitly
The good news is that the reading demands of practical work can be taught without adding a large burden to an already crowded curriculum. The routines can be short, and they can be built into the practical lesson itself.
1. Walk through the text before the equipment
Before pupils collect apparatus, give them two or three minutes to read the method with a purpose. Ask them to identify the verbs, the quantities, and the sequence. A simple prompt works well: Underline every instruction that tells you to do something. Circle every number and unit. This makes the structure of the method visible and gives the teacher a quick sense of who has understood the task.
2. Turn risks into if-then statements
Risk assessments are often written in compressed conditional language. Ask pupils to rewrite each hazard as an if-then statement: If acid gets on your skin, then rinse it immediately with plenty of water. This is a brief activity, but it makes the safety logic explicit. It also supports pupils who need to see the relationship between condition and action.
3. Read the table before the results
Ask pupils to read the data table before they begin collecting data. What goes in the first column? What goes in the second? What units are used? What kind of value would be reasonable? This prevents the common problem of pupils recording data in the wrong place or forgetting units. It also helps them see the table as a representation of the investigation rather than a blank grid to be filled.
4. Unpack success criteria
Success criteria are often written in abstract language. Ask pupils to translate them into concrete actions. Record observations to an appropriate precision might become record temperature to the nearest 0.5 °C or record time to the nearest second. This translation is not a dilution of standards. It is a clarification of what the standard means in practice.
5. Use a pre-practical checkpoint
A short checkpoint before equipment is issued can prevent a great deal of confusion. Ask three questions: What are you trying to find out? What is the first thing you will do? What is one hazard and what will you do about it? Pupils can answer orally or in writing. The checkpoint takes a few minutes, and it ensures that the reading has served its purpose.
A more scientific practical
None of this is to suggest that practical work should become a literacy lesson. The purpose of the practical is to develop scientific understanding through direct experience of phenomena. But direct experience is mediated by texts. The method, the risk assessment, the table, and the success criteria are not peripheral. They are part of how practical work is organised and made safe.
Teaching pupils to read these texts explicitly is therefore not a distraction from science. It is a way of making the science more accessible and more rigorous. It helps pupils move from following instructions to understanding investigations. It supports inclusion without lowering expectations. And it recognises that the reading work before the flame is part of the practical itself.
