1.  The Wellcome Trust is pleased to respond to the Science and Technology Committee inquiry into the funding of science and discovery centres. The Wellcome Trust is the largest charity in the UK. It funds innovative biomedical research, in the UK and internationally, spending around £500 million each year to support the brightest scientists with the best ideas. The Wellcome Trust supports public debate about biomedical research and its impact on health and wellbeing.

  2.  The Wellcome Trust has been actively involved in the science centre sector in the UK over the past decade, and has provided approximately £40 million through a number of routes:

—  Millennium awards: the Trust awarded £13.8 million to five Millennium science centres—At-Bristol; Birmingham ThinkTank; Dundee Sensation; Glasgow Science Centre; and the Newcastle International Centre for Life. The Trust also provided £17.8 million for the development of the Wellcome Wing at the Science Museum in London, and £3 million to move the Science for Life exhibition from the Wellcome building to the Manchester Museum of Science and Industry.

—  Rediscover: a £33 million partnership with the Millennium Commission, the Wellcome Trust (contribution £5 million) and the Wolfson Foundation which offered grants to UK science centres and museums to renew, replace, refresh or redevelop exhibition space, from 2002-06.

—  Engaging Science grants scheme: individual grants to projects led by science centres, for example the Trust has funded At-Bristol to develop "Inside DNA: a genomic revolution", a £1.5 million exhibition that will tour the UK exploring issues related to developments in genetics.

—  Support for Ecsite-UK, the national science and discovery centre network.

  3.  Independent evaluation of the five Trust-funded Millennium centres, conducted by CRG Research Ltd. in 2006, assessed the impact of the centres on public engagement with science and science education.[6] This response draws on the findings of the report; we enclose a copy of the Executive Summary. While not representing the whole sector in the UK, the five Millennium centres do cover a broad spectrum of different types of centre, from small through to large centres, with very different resource levels, visitor numbers, and turnover.

  4.  The main points we make in this response include:

—  Science centres have a key role to play in delivering informal education, particularly for primary audiences. However, there needs to be better integration of formal and informal learning.

—  Core funding is crucial, to allow science centres to plan strategically, develop sustainable business plans, and work more collaboratively.

—  The sector requires strong and focused support from the Government.

—  Improved evaluation mechanisms are needed to monitor and understand the impact of the sector.

THE ROLE OF SCIENCE CENTRES IN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

  5.  Science Centres provide a unique place where children, schools and families can go to find out about science. The five Trust-funded Millennium centres are primarily educational institutions, supporting public engagement with science, and formal and informal science education. Their remit is to make science accessible, engage the general public, and stimulate informed debate. This is achieved through a wide range of activities including permanent and temporary displays, interactive exhibits, and a range of seasonal programmes, science shows, and events.

  6.  The impact assessment report found that the five centres act as regional "hubs" for science based activities, providing "extensive educational resources to local schools". The main focus is on supporting formal education for primary schools and children aged 7-11 years old. Although secondary school audiences are also important to the science centres, the evaluation found that it appears to be more difficult for the centres to support formal education for secondary schools, mainly because of difficulties with school timetabling and the need for clear curriculum links.

  7.  Science centres are able to offer a very different learning experience to that of the classroom. The majority of teachers who participated in the impact assessment spoke positively about the science centres, commenting that their trips: "helped to create a positive attitude towards science in my pupils"; "brought [science] to life"; "made science real"; "help[ed] the kids to engage"; and "helped children visualise the curriculum".

  8.  However, in order to provide maximum value to schools, it is important to ensure a more integrated approach to formal and informal learning. At-Bristol for example hosts the South-West Science Learning Centre, allowing it to integrate effectively with local teachers, schools and the wider network of Science Learning Centres. The impact assessment recommended that centres need to work more closely with teachers to ensure appropriate curriculum links, and to discuss the best ways for school groups to utilise the centre's resources.

  9.  The STEM programme report, looking at ways to enhance STEM literacy in the population, recommended that there was an urgent need "to rationalise and improve the delivery of the current plethora of STEM initiatives" to ensure greater effectiveness and enable maximum reach. However, the report made little mention of science centres suggesting that the centres are seen, by the formal sector, to be on the periphery of science education. This highlights the need to improve the integration of formal and informal learning, and to support links between the science centres and formal education programmes. We would also encourage the STEM High Level Strategy Group to consider the links between formal and informal learning as part of its discussions.

  10.  In addition to their educational remit, science centres also provide a range of opportunities for informal education for wider audiences. The impact assessment concluded that the centres "represent a wealth of knowledge and expertise relating to wider aspects of public engagement with science and science education". The centres provide a variety of one-off events and debates, aimed at promoting dialogue between scientists and the public and providing a platform for discussion about scientific issues. The level of this type of activity varies from centre to centre. However, there may be potential to extend this role further in future, for example by supporting lifelong learning, or providing more opportunities for scientists to engage with the public.

FUNDING FOR SCIENCE CENTRES

  11.  Despite the substantial investment in science centres at the turn of the Millennium, a number of the centres now lack secure funding. Interactive exhibits are particularly expensive to maintain, and the need to update displays regularly to reflect the rapid pace of change in science and technology adds further pressures.

  12.  The impact assessment found that particular challenges include: stabilising their income to ensure that there are sufficient funds to deliver their core operations; and accessing new funds to allow the centres to develop innovative approaches to public engagement. As a result, some centres have undergone considerable change over the past five years, including extensive organisational restructuring in response to financial pressures.

  13.  One of the key concerns is that a number of centres are increasingly forced to respond to immediate funding opportunities, and may be diversifying their offer as a result. Some centres appear to be taking a short-term approach to planning as they search for any available source of support. It is crucial for every science centre to develop a sustainable long-term strategy, but this will depend on financial security and the availability of core funding. We would encourage the Government to provide central funding, and to set strategic goals for the sector. This may require some selectivity in order to improve focus and strengthen regional hubs. Centres must be encouraged to develop sustainable business models, supported by a wide range of funders, and to build effective partnerships with Government, industry, charities and academia.

  14.  Greater collaboration between science centres is also needed, sharing best practice and maximising the opportunities for working together, for example to support training and evaluation. Collaborations to develop touring exhibitions offer particular benefits. Science Centres need to have strong temporary displays to attract repeat visitors from the local region; effective touring exhibitions could provide an ideal solution but rely on strong partnerships which have often been lacking. Concerns have been raised that the lack of central funding and the perception that centres are in competition with each other have tended to reduce collaborative work. There may be lessons to learn from Scotland: Scottish science centres are increasingly well networked, and benefit from the funding and support provided by the Scottish parliament.

  15.  The impact assessment suggested that "national stakeholders felt that the lack of sectoral focus ... hampers the impact science centres might make", and went on to conclude that "other, older, science centres throughout the world have gone through this maturation process, often assisted by financial security and a guaranteed place in the educational and cultural landscape." Again, core funding and strategic planning should help the centres to consolidate their position within science education. The sector would also benefit from a strong overseeing body, to provide a coherent and unified "voice", and to allow the centres to have a greater impact on policy discussions.

  16.  It will also be important to ensure appropriate evaluation mechanisms are established across the sector. At the moment there are no requirements to collect data or evaluate programmes. The impact assessment found that the lack of consistent data made it difficult to make meaningful comparisons between centres. We recommend that the introduction of systematic monitoring and evaluation systems should be a prerequisite of any future funding, in order to help understand the impact of the sector more fully.

  17.  The sector needs strong support from the Government, and we welcome this inquiry into the funding of science centres. As the Committee develops its recommendations, we suggest it may also help to clarify whether responsibility for science centres should rest with the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, the Department of Education and Skills, or the Office of Science and Innovation, in order to ensure a clear and robust Government message.

June 2007