Science is not just the brainy preserve of the stereotypical boffins you see on TV. In an interview last week, the head of the British Science Association, Katherine Mathieson, said this formal public image was not helpful and that we need to see more of the everyday people involved in science. She called for this everyday approach to science to extend to teaching, with creative experiments involving “genuine open-ended research by pupils, rather than fiddling around with beakers”.

Mathieson also worries that science is not a topic of common conversation in the way that sport or pop culture is. She is right to raise concerns; after all, if we can get our minds around detailed football tactics, then complexity is not the issue.

The ability of people to understand the world they live in increasingly depends on their understanding of scientific ideas. Science allows us to learn reliably about nature – if an experimental result does not support a specific idea, then the idea has to be rejected or modified and then tested again. For most people, such understanding – by imagination or experimentation – comes through education. ​Great teachers are the driving force behind the UK’s position as a global scientific powerhouse.

However, overly tight accountability measures, rapidly changing curricula and burdensome pupil progress monitoring are among the enormous pressures on schools that impede the creation of an environment in which tomorrow’s scientists can learn and grow. In 2013, a report published by Score found that a worrying number of primary students were not experiencing a complete science education because of a lack of resources for practical work, with the average school having only 46% of the equipment needed. The UK is failing to create a scientifically informed society that can confidently hold science properly to account by engaging, enjoying and, yes, criticising it.

The UK is failing to create a scientifically informed society that can confidently hold science properly to account

Children learn about music by trying their hand at composing a song or joining a jazz trio, rock band or string quartet. Others take GCSE art, where we expect them to try out sketching and to use watercolours, mixed-media or creative photography to learn about the subject. Even the most doting relative does not expect these creations to end up in a museum or concert hall, but what they teach our children about the artistic process is essential.

Science should be treated in the same way. Humans have always been curious about the natural world and the stuff that makes it up. The Book of Job in the Old Testament contains speculation about why the stars of the Pleiades are bound together, while those of Orion are scattered. Centuries before we formalised the scientific method, we had thoughtful and playful experiments with light, glass and water as well as astonishingly careful observations of the stars. People dreamed up imaginative theories of what might be going on up in rainbows and down inside liquids and solids. It wasn’t always right, but science can be a messy business on the path to truth. Why should things be different in 2017?

The Royal Society emphasises “experimental” over “practical” science, where curiosity goes beyond following a recipe and people simply try things – a thoughtful way of looking for answers. We need to reverse recent trends and increase the amount of time and money invested in experimental and problem-solving work in science and mathematics education through access to adequately resourced laboratories and well-trained teachers.

Experimental science in education complements rather than replaces the learning of core scientific understanding. Sir John Holman found that participating in investigative science improved attainment in core science exams, with greater effect for pupils in less privileged areas.

There are other promising signs – the new Institute for Research in Schools is right now realising Mathieson’s vision of pupils taking on genuine open-ended research. We currently have many examples of good practice at primary and secondary schools and colleges across the UK. Investing in experimental science in all schools to help future generations make better sense of the world around them means that one day we will have confident opinions on scientific issues in the same way that we do on, say, Premier League statistics.

• Tom McLeish is chair of the Royal Society’s education committee and professor of physics at Durham university.