Considering how many years I spent in formal science education, it is a little depressing to realise how much I have forgotten, writes Sarah Teather.
I have seen four classes today, Years 7, 8, 9 and 13, with four different teachers.
Year 7 were learning about how molecules are arranged to form solids, liquids and gas in a follow-up theory lesson to their practical last week. The teacher also had the children role-playing - pretending to be molecules in different forms, a really vivid way to explain the idea.
Year 9 were learning about cloning - a prime example of how science curricula have adapted to incorporate scientific advances. It is incredible to think that 13-year-olds are routinely learning about something which was theoretical just 10 years ago.
Year 13 was smaller than your average university tuition group. Only four teenagers had opted for chemistry A-level, but the upside was that they got plenty of individual attention from the teacher. I just about remember electrode potentials, but that really felt a long time ago.
Year 8 were studying acids and alkalis. Now that was a fun lesson. Very lively and good-natured.
Several things struck me today. First, school science is quite difficult. It is very fact-rich, and you can't do the fun stuff without covering the basics.
I was obsessed with science from an early age. It was my best subject by far.
But today for the first time I realised why if you don't immediately take to it, you could always struggle. In many other subjects, you can get lost for a while and yet find windows of access later which allow you to rejoin. If you haven't mastered the basic concepts and language of physics and chemistry you can't progress.
I spoke about this with the director of science during breaktime. He agreed that a factually rich compulsory curriculum can make this difficult for some students. He particularly welcomed the recent change in GCSE structure so that those students who are struggling can follow a different course.
The purpose of teaching all young people science is to make sure everyone has a basic grasp of the scientific principles to allow them to understand and engage with modern issues. They don't all need to know about covalent bonds, for example. Wouldn't it be better to allow teachers even more freedom to vary their curriculum according to their students?
The other thing that was very apparent by the end of day two, is how exhausting the job could be. One relatively new teacher told me she usually arrives at school about 7:15am and leaves about 6:30pm. She tries not to take work home every evening but often does.
And it is intense - a bit like my job in that way - you stand at the front and give all of yourself, for a long time. If that is combined with a bit of low-level disruption, which is a problem in some classes in every school, it must be very wearing by the end of the day. Again, I was reminded of my own job, speaking in the House of Commons.
It is all about authority - if you hint at not having it someone will push their luck. If you deal with their cheek quickly, efficiently and without obviously rising to it, you'll be fine. If you make a fuss, or fail to squash it quickly enough, you will drown in seconds.
Not the first time I have compared the chamber to a classroom. Frankly, these classrooms were a lot better behaved.
Sarah Teather is the Liberal Democrats' education spokesperson
Read Sarah's blog from day one here.
