Science – not so long ago – was in a state of disrepair. In 2007, only 12% of students left university with a science degree, as the University and College Union warned that sciences and maths degrees were in ‘irreversible decline’. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI), too, warned that the numbers of science graduates needed to double before 2014 in order to meet skilled-worker demand. Lord Drayson, the ex-Minister for Science, described the curriculum as being “flawed”, as the physical sciences, in particularly, became increasingly unpopular.
But a government re-think predating the hysteria is finally bearing fruit. In 2006 the STEM programme identified science, technology, engineering, and mathematics as ‘strategically important and vulnerable subjects’. The Higher Education Funding Council for England’s (HEFCE) subsequent £350 million worth of additional support has seen a 6.8% rise in students taking STEM subjects. But a CBI spokesperson, speaking yesterday, said that a 50% increase in STEM graduates is needed by 2017 to meet demand.
Since 2006 there has been around a 10% increase in chemistry admissions – but a slight decline in applications. The CBI, however, argues that 25% of all graduates need to be in STEM subjects by 2017. But there continues to be fears over comprehensive science education. This year a National Science Learning Centres poll argued that school pupils were not afforded enough practical time in science lessons, as the director, Professor Sir John Holman, said: “Learning science without practicals is the equivalent of studying literature without books.”
The introduction of the IGCSE, by Michael Gove this year, has been predicted to help. Parkside Community College, in Cambridge, for example, has adopted the qualification, believing it will better equip students for science A-levels. But with only 60 states schools taking advantage of the IGCSE, the result could be more ‘squeaky pop’ experiment than big bang.
Posted on August 9, 2010