Re : Turned off science


Seeing that 150 years after Darwin !!! Stunning !


Le 18/06/2005 00:03, dans
fNHse.5969$NX4.1823@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, « SKS »
<info2knospam@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> With reference to Jai's earlier post, here are a few more on that issue, or
> nearabouts:
>
> 1. Turned off science
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8074471/
>
> 2. Only dead scientists are known to teens
> http://education.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5217856-110908,00.html
>
> 3. Science dull and hard, pupils say
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4100936.stm
>
> 4. Education: Science - in safe hands?
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1602397,00.html
>
> 5. Young people are often turned off science
> http://www.earthwatch.org/australia/EWSchool/General.htm
>
> 6. No antidote to science phobia
> http://www.rednova.com/modules/news/tools.php?tool=print&id=13723
>
>
> Respective Texts below:
>
> 1. Turned off science
>
> By Sandra Lilley
> News planning editor
> NBC News
> Updated: 3:35 p.m. ET June 3, 2005
>
> Sandra Lilley
> News planning editor
>
> The battle over teaching evolution is raging in communities across the
> country, but the headlines rarely focus on the "quiet" impact of this
> controversy.
>
> Science is becoming a political "hot potato" for some students -
> transforming what should be a dynamic, fascinating topic into a total
> turn-off. And some students are choosing silence over losing a prom date.
>
> "Children are very much worried about their place in the world. Some
> students only ask me about evolution privately, after class," said Wes
> McCoy, PhD, who teaches Genetics, Biology and Astronomy at North Cobb High
> School in Kennessaw, Ga.
>
> McCoy, who has won the Georgia "Outstanding Biology Teacher" award, is
> active in his Presbyterian church and also serves on the National Executive
> Board of the Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology and the
> Christian faith, is saddened by what he has seen in his classroom.
>
> "Students face consequences if they choose to accept evolution in a
> family or a church or a community that patently rejects evolution ... It
> might affect whether you get a date to the prom, or whether you get that
> summer job or not," McCoy said. "You may even anger close family members.
> Conversations about evolution can make family reunions very tense."
>
> And at a time when the National Science Foundation projects that the
> number of scientists and engineers reaching retirement age is expected to
> triple in the next 10 years, McCoy and others argue that the "evolution
> wars" are taking time away from their life's work - making these children
> excited and prepared - to become the next Jonas Salk or Bill Gates.
>
> Science politicized
> The town of Kennessaw, where McCoy teaches, is part of Cobb County,
> Ga. It was in Cobb County that a U.S. district judge recently ruled against
> the "evolution is just a theory" disclaimer sticker, which had been placed
> on science textbooks by the local school board.
>
> So is this a "victory" for the educators, who argued against the
> stickers in federal court?
>
> "The decision to place stickers on the books already reflects an
> unfortunate politicization of science," said Brown University professor
> Kenneth Miller, the co-author of"Biology," the textbook that had the
> stickers removed.
>
> "Clearly the right thing to do was to remove those stickers and treat
> evolution as any other subject. But in a sense it has already done damage to
> science teaching by implying that evolution is especially weak and
> especially shaky, when it reality it is neither," Miller said.
>
> Clare McKinney teaches biology and zoology at Jefferson High School in
> Lafayette, Indiana. She is also a Christian who has been on national news
> defending the teaching of evolution in the classroom.
>
> McKinney explained why the debate over evolution versus creationism is
> appealing - and important - to children in her classes.
>
> "For kids this age, fairness is a real issue. Many children, who are
> not even familiar with the sound evidence surrounding evolution, signed
> petitions to 'include' intelligent design because it seemed 'fair,'" said
> McKinney. That said, she also understands the pressure these children feel
> to "reconcile" their beliefs with science - she went through it herself.
>
> According to McKinney, interested students have waited until they are
> outside the classroom to discuss what they perceive as "conflicting" views.
> "I have flat out told students that the more I know about science, the more
> glorious God seems," said McKinney.
>
> She stresses in her classroom that "science is not out to prove the
> presence or absence of God - whatever you believe, it's OK," adding, "You
> can almost see the anxiety level diminish when I say that."
>
> A unified theory
> But what concerns educators like Miller is whether this politicization
> of basic science dissuades children from going into the field.
>
> Miller, an enthusiastic Catholic who wrote the book "Finding Darwin's
> God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution,"
> finds this troubling.
>
> "Science is the one thing that is universal across cultures.and yet
> [after the evolution debates] some children in this country are seeing
> science as a potential minefield," explained Miller.
>
> "We are at a disadvantage if we don't teach kids evolution, because
> it's
> the one unified theory that can explain everything from antibiotic
> resistance to pesticide resistance over time," Miller said. "If a child
> becomes a pharmacist and someone develops a resistance to a drug, that is
> evolution. We have to be able to teach it well."
>
> © 2005 MSNBC Interactive
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 2. Only dead scientists are known to teens
>
> Rebecca Smithers, education editor
> Friday June 17, 2005
>
> Guardian
>
> Teenagers are so out of touch with modern science that they cannot name a
> single living scientist, a survey reveals today.
>
> Environmentalist and broadcaster David Bellamy was the closest that two out
> of almost 1,000 respondents got. Others cited Madonna, Chemical Ali,
> Leonardo da Vinci and Christopher Columbus. Some students even plumped for
> their science teachers.
>
> Students, aged 13-16, were asked to name a famous scientist in an online
> survey carried out by exam board OCR. Isaac Newton (39%) and Albert Einstein
> (29%) topped the list, which included Marie Curie, Charles Darwin and
> Alexander Fleming; but the students were stumped when it came to naming
> living scientists.
>
> The findings also reveal that although eight out of 10 students (79%) said
> scientists were clever, just 7% said they were "cool or fun". Over half
> (51%) said they thought science lessons were boring, confusing or
> difficult - feelings that intensified as students progressed through
> secondary school in years 9, 10 and 11.
>
> Students also resented the fact that science is compulsory, with many
> wishing to drop it at GCSE. If given the choice, 45% of students would take
> biology GCSE, 32% chemistry, 29% physics, 19% combined science and 16% would
> opt out altogether. Clara Kenyon, OCR's director of general assessment,
> said: "The results go to show the growing apathy in today's students about
> science ... It is startling that no students named those responsible for
> recent scientific advances, for example, Ian Wilmut, who cloned Dolly the
> sheep, or Professor Colin Pillinger, who headed the Beagle 2 space probe to
> Mars project.
>
> "If we can't enthuse and inspire young people about the subject while they
> are at school, then who will carry on [Britain's] great tradition of
> scientific discovery?
>
> "Universities are reporting falling numbers of science students and there is
> a widely reported shortage of science teachers and lab technicians."
>
> OCR is offering GCSEs from September designed to help students understand
> science by touching on everyday subjects such as mobile phone technology and
> cloning.
>
> Ms Kenyon said she was encouraged "that unprompted, over one-third (39%) of
> students stated the best thing about studying science was taking part in
> practical experiments, with 24% telling us the best aspect of science for
> them was gaining knowledge.
>
> "Students may not see science as interesting, but they appreciate that it
> will be relevant to their future."
>
> EducationGuardian.co.uk © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 3. Science dull and hard, pupils say
>
> Last Updated: Thursday, 16 June, 2005, 23:37 GMT 00:37 UK
>
> Science dull and hard, pupils say
>
> Scientists were seen by most pupils as clever
>
> Some 51% of teenagers think science lessons are boring, confusing or
> difficult, a survey suggests.
>
> Figures from the OCR exam board, which interviewed 950 children aged
> 13 to 16 in England, showed 7% thought people working in the area were
> "cool".
>
> The number of pupils choosing to study physics and chemistry at school
> and university level is falling.
>
> According to the survey, some children thought singer Madonna and
> explorer Christopher Columbus were scientists.
>
> Giving up
>
> When asked to name a famous scientist, 39% suggested Isaac Newton and
> 29% Albert Einstein.
>
> Also on the list were Marie Curie, Charles Darwin and Alexander
> Fleming.
>
> The survey reveals that 79% of pupils associated scientists with being
> clever.
>
> The children were asked if they would study science subjects if they
> were not compulsory.
>
> Some 45% said they would take biology, 32% chemistry, 29% physics and
> 19% combined science.
>
> But 16% would not choose any of them.
>
> Clara Kenyon, director of general assessment at OCR, said: "The
> results go to show the growing apathy in today's students about science and
> their ignorance of modern day achievements.
>
> "It is startling that no students named those responsible for recent
> scientific advances, for example, Ian Wilmut who cloned Dolly the sheep or
> Professor Colin Pillinger who headed the Beagle 2 space probe to Mars
> project."
>
> OCR is launching a different type of science GCSE from next year,
> which it says will encourage more involvement with modern topics such as
> cloning or mobile phone technology.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comments by readers:
>
> Is it fair for pupils to say school science is boring, confusing or
> difficult? What can be done to make lessons more interesting for pupils?
> Send us you comments using the form below.
>
> Science IS easy. The problem is pupils are not arriving with the
> appropriate skills (eg. decent level of maths [particularly mental
> arithmetic and equation skills] and logical analysis skills) and the subject
> is dull and watered down with lots of irrelevant side issues (nothing to get
> them excited to want to learn WHY something works). To be a scientist you
> have to be able to comprehend and want to comprehend.
> David, UK
>
> Science in schools is now boring because the kids are no longer
> allowed to do or see anything interesting. The health and safety brigade
> have stopped every interesting experiment or demonstration being carried out
> and the kids have to learn everything from a book. Plus as Philip Copeland
> points out you can earn more on the checkout in Tesco than you can working
> in a lab. Plus in Tesco you don't spend your life working on short term
> contracts.
> Paul, Scotland
>
> To echo many of the comments, a pay commensurate with the time and
> effort put in to become an experienced scientist would make science a lot
> more interesting, at least to researchers like me.
> Bernard, Parma, Italy
>
> Why bother to study difficult science subjects such as chemistry,
> physics etc in order to become a scientist when you can study easier
> business/management degrees and become a scientist's boss on a much higher
> wage?
> Disgruntled Scientist, Herts, England
>
> Are the happiest societies in the world the ones that are most
> scientifically advanced? I doubt it... The things that bring joy to me
> personally are the subtleties of a great novel, the intricacies of a
> masterful musical composition, or the imagination behind an inspired work of
> art. It's appreciation of these things that I would rather see focused on in
> our schools - I applaud the 16% of our kids that would choose not to do any
> science!
> Stevan Anastasoff, Birmingham, UK
>
> Why suddenly everything has to be fun? Kids are superficial and often
> can't recognise what's really good to know until they're, most of the time,
> too old to learn that again. I wish my parents insisted more on me learning
> some things when I was a kid. Sometimes kids first have to learn something,
> later they'll learn to love it. Of course, without good teachers who also
> love and understand what they teach this can't be done.
> Igor, Dublin, Ireland
>
> I feel one problem is the inability of some science teachers to
> properly communicate what they are teaching since they don't understand it
> properly themselves. Biologists are often made to teach physics and science
> GCSE teachers have often only studied up to A-level standards, for instance.
> If you don't understand something fully yourself then how can you expect to
> teach and inspire children about it?
> Paul, Edinburgh, UK
>
> Science is not difficult or boring. The curriculum and way it is
> taught is bad. My son was recently 'taught' about the internal combustion
> engine using nothing more than a blackboard - not a model, not an engine,
> not anything useful in sight. He has also just been taught about CFC's and
> global warming!
> Dave, England
>
> I gave maths and physics coaching (in Australia) to final year school
> students for 5 years, while I was studying engineering. After I'd finished
> that job, I asked my boss what the students at the coaching college went on
> to study later at University. He told me that 95% of the (scores of)
> students that I had taught went on to study either medicine or law and that
> they only studied maths/science at school because it was easy to rote-learn
> and get high marks. This was in the 1980s. This situation isn't likely to
> change while the brightest students avoid becoming school teachers (for
> obvious reasons).
> Graham Pulford, Farnborough, UK
>
> The curriculum needs to be modernised to include things that are
> of relevance for the younger generation
>
> Jamie Muirhead, Poole, UK
> I sat my GCSEs last year and the sciences were always the most mind
> numbing. The science lessons themselves were generally uninspired and, as
> far as I was concerned, wholly irrelevant to anything that would occur in
> 'real life'. I think that the curriculum needs to be modernised to include
> things that are of relevance for the younger generation, otherwise the
> popularity of the sciences will continue to dwindle.
> Jamie Muirhead, Poole, UK
>
> Surely this is what the top-up fees are made for? Simply reduce the
> fees for these courses and more people will take them.
> Huw Pendry, Bridgend, Wales
>
> Science is fab. I am in my 30s and am about to complete an A level in
> Human Biology and have really enjoyed it. I wish I had paid more attention
> to science at school. I am actively encouraging my children through my
> current studies to be interested and active in science and to question why
> things are the way they are.
> Claire Littlejohns, Torquay, Devon
>
> Be glad - in Spain the equivalent of A level students apparently do
> not do practical experiments for health and safety reasons. A Spanish
> student at my son's school in Surrey revelled in the quality and content of
> the science teaching here. Be wary the same approach does not come from
> Europe.
> Caz, Ewell, Surrey
>
> I'm doing my GCSEs now, and I can tell you that the students know the
> names of Darwin, Curie and Einstein because they're all in the syllabus, and
> the other people (the Beagle man and Mr Dolly the sheep) are not. I read the
> papers and interne articles, and they aren't mentioned there either. If they
> receive such a lack of media attention AND are not taught in schools then
> how are we expected to know them? On a related (but different) point, The
> Biology exam this year had nothing to do with human biology whatsoever. The
> kidney, the heart, the respiratory system are all in the syllabus and we
> spent a long time learning about them, but nothing has come up. To Sharon
> Kinge and James - I'm doing the Separate Science exams. It means that you
> have to take an extra, harder exam in each of the three subjects, but you
> get an extra GCSE and your Physics results do not affect your Biology
> results etc.
> Andrew Lewis, Canterbury
>
> I graduated from Sussex Uni in the early '90s having studied Physics -
> Ok - it didn't seem well respected at the time, but now I can fool anybody
> and hence earn lots of money doing close to nothing! - Kids! -Stick with the
> hard subjects now and reap the rewards later!
> Matt, Rushden
>
> Part of the problem is that doing difficult intellectual things is no
> longer considered attractive by young people. Attractive role model
> characteristics include things like being famous, being rich, showing off
> that you are rich, and being popular. All pretty vacuous traits. We need to
> try to change attitudes towards the rewards of undertaking difficult
> personal endeavours, that will not bring 'bling' or fame. Parents - limiting
> telly watching time to 1 or 2 hours per day would assist greatly in this ...
> BS McIntosh, Milton Keynes, UK
>
> Who says science/engineering is boring - try law!
> Ken Poole, Buckingham, UK
>
> When in the late 70s I studied biology and Chemistry to O level, as I
> was hopeless at mathematics, due to poor teaching, and hence missed physics
> for the same reason, I gained A and B grades, however later went to
> university to study law. How boring that was, totally unlike the way lawyers
> lives are portrayed in the media. Since graduating I have worked exclusively
> in engineering, on programmes such as military Radar/Arianne rocket/MRI body
> scanners - I am constantly learning - Who says science/engineering is
> boring - try law!
> Ken Poole, Buckingham, UK
>
> I have 3 science A levels, and a 1st class honours degree in
> engineering from a good university. So, what field do I work in? I work at
> the interface between business and technology rather than in a hard core
> technological discipline itself, since this enables me to provide a good
> standard of living for my family. Many of my colleagues took less
> educationally demanding routes to get to similar positions. I do not regret
> the difficult path I took to get here, and am proud of my scientific
> training and thought patterns, but I can see there were far easier routes.
> We will not see significant numbers of young people entering scientific
> careers, or staying in them in my case, until the rewards are there - it's
> that simple. This will have serious consequences for the competitive
> position of UK PLC.
> Alex, Swansea, UK
>
> I'm a scientist working in medical research and agree with Philip
> Copeland's comments - I assume he's a scientist! There are several points I
> would like to make: firstly, these findings are not surprising - my memory
> of school science (even up to A-level) is that it was poorly taught and I
> suspect many of my teachers did not understand what they were teaching. In
> addition, much of it was boring, irrelevant and outdated, for example, how
> does endless drawing of specimens help if you are going to be a career
> scientist? Secondly, science is hard - there is no way around that, but I am
> sure course syllabuses could be made exciting and more relevant. Thirdly,
> careers in science pay extremely poorly - we earn less than nurses, teachers
> and police officers and have no job stability - we work on 2 year contracts
> with no certainty of a position continuing beyond the end of the contract,
> so there is no incentive to chose science because there is little point
> continuing it if you're not going to do it as a career.
> Lisa Clayton, Cardiff, Wales
>
> I'm a mechanical engineering student, and regularly visit elementary
> classrooms to teach kids about engineering. They enjoy it so much more if
> they can build something, and then we explain why their ideas worked in
> simple terms. The difficulty with science is that sometimes teachers will
> only teach facts, which students memorize and that is all they know about
> science. It was the hands on learning in my schooling that engaged and
> continues to engage my interest, and I think it really gives students a
> personal interest in science, rather than a personal interest in what grade
> they will receive.
> Katie, Indiana, USA
>
> One good reason for students not being inclined to study science is
> the poor salaries paid to scientists, especially at the start of their
> career. Scientists are supposedly "professionals" yet are often paid the
> same as a semi skilled worker. It is notable that the same employers who
> bemoan the lack of Science Graduates etc coming into the workplace also
> expect to pay these people low wages.
> Gary Huckins, Guisborough Cleveland
>
> School teachers, especially in state schools, seem to have lost
> any passion for the subject
> Tim, Bristol
>
> Well GCSE science is pretty boring when it comes down to it. School
> teachers, especially in state schools, seem to have lost any passion for the
> subject, caring only for the grade results. When I did GCSE sciences my
> biology teacher was the only one that really seemed to enjoy the subject. He
> would go way off syllabus to explain his favourite bits, tell us funny
> stories from the medical journals and give weird little facts.
> Tim, Bristol
>
> Let's get real here. Conventional GCSE and A level courses in physics
> and chemistry are, for the most part, boring. I say this as a medical
> graduate with 3 science A levels. I have watched my two sons trying to get
> to grips with these subjects at school - they just cannot see the practical
> relevance of most of the topics. I must admit that I can empathise with
> this; it's difficult at the age of 15 seeing the relevance of forces,
> moments and work - to take one example. The courses need to be more
> practically-based, ie applied and delivered by teachers who can inspire. I
> must admit, having seen the syllabus for all 10 of my son's GCSE courses,
> subjects like business studies and economics look much more interesting than
> the science courses. It makes me wish I had done those instead!
> Dr Liz Saunders, Worthing
>
> I'm currently reading a Physics PhD and am also working in a local
> high school to try to interest kids in science. I've found that there are
> few relevant, hands on experiments. We're currently running a science club
> and a science fair and shockingly enough they love trying to blow the school
> up or testing products to destruction! New health and safety regulations
> have taken a lot of fun experiments out of the curriculum and yet there's
> two whole generations above me that survived them! Science requires a lot of
> effort (1% inspiration and 99% perspiration) and too many children don't
> want to put any effort in at all (not just in their science lessons).
>
> The other thing the scheme is to trying to change is the social
> stereotypes. We need chemists and biologists in flashy cars and physicists
> to wear less black. There are few scientists in the public view. If you look
> hard enough you can find the odd science program tucked away on BBC2 but
> once upon a time Tomorrow's World was on: the technologies may not have
> always worked but it showed how science was developing and explained it.
> Personally, I think we need a film to do for science what Indiana Jones did
> for archaeology (Dr Christmas Jones in Bond 19 was a step in the right
> direction but even though I'm not a "typical" physicist I draw the line at
> hot-pants).
> Helen, Durham, UK
>
> Could it be that the problem lies with the fact that in primary
> schools science is taught for only one and a quarter hours and that most
> primary schools do not have any teachers with science degrees. To help plug
> this gap we launched Mad Science for primary schools in September 2004 and
> bring the type of equipment and programming that the state sector primary
> schools simply do not have access to. More than five thousand children have
> now enjoyed our lessons and the typical reaction is that they used to think
> science was boring and now realise it is cool. We intend to launch key stage
> three programmes in 2006 to keep the motivation through secondary schools.
> Alan Sheridan, London, England
>
> The sandals and socks are optional
> Mark, Cambridge, UK
>
> Yes, science is difficult. It's also beautiful and rewarding. If the
> pupils voicing these gripes were to follow through my chosen subject
> (theoretical physics) then they will discover mind blowing concepts greater
> than any dubious chemical they may consume. The sandals and socks are
> optional.
> Mark, Cambridge, UK
>
> Science is not the same as science teaching; the difficulty is how
> teachers in the UK are selected, trained and promoted. Teaching is about
> communicating and scientists don't often do that well, it's almost
> contradictory. The solution? Train excellent communicators to teach science
> and maths - ie the ability to teach should come first, not the ability to
> understand science. But that won't happen in this country because teaching
> has been de-professionalised and continues to be badly rewarded,
> Anders Stark, Cardiff UK
>
> I did not take any science subjects to GCE 'O' level and now regret it
> as I have found in later life an active interest in science. I am glad that
> my daughter enjoys science at school and college. She is now hoping to do a
> genetics degree plus a foreign language. I hope that this will lead to a
> rewarding career for her as she deserves this for all her effort
> Roger Simpson, Stockport UK
>
> I have just completed A levels in Chemistry, Biology and Geography all
> three considered sciences. I love science. Unfortunately I feel I am unable
> to pursue a career in research or lab work as how will live on £16,000 a
> year gross salary and having to repay university fees?
> Nicola, Belfast
>
> Oooh, so some children don't like to sit down and learn stuff, I'd
> never have thought it.... As principle Skinner said in the Simpsons: "Aaah
> science, the joy of sitting down, staying quiet and paying attention"
> AJ, Glasgow
>
> Science is stereotyped as nerdy just as politics is stereotyped
> as boring and art as a doss subject
> Amanda Freeston, Hampshire, Farnborough
>
> They make it sound like it is unexpected. I love Biology and Chemistry
> but I am hopeless with physics. I am just starting my 2nd year of A-levels
> in both Biology and Chemistry and it may not be easy but that doesn't
> matter. Science is stereotyped as nerdy just as politics is stereotyped as
> boring and art as a doss subject. I have been a voluntary class room
> assistant for a science class and it is taught at theory level only. No
> subject is interesting like that!
> Amanda Freeston, Hampshire, Farnborough
>
> What's the point in learning maths or science? In Britain you'll earn
> more as an astrologist, or feng shui consultant. Or a paper-shuffling civil
> servant with huge final salary pension paid for by the taxpayer.
> Jason Wilkins, UK
>
> Having spent a week in a local school encouraging pupils to consider a
> career in science it does seem that most want to earn as much money as
> possible with as little effort as possible. Is this really surprising given
> society's current inclination towards the "fast buck" (e.g. personal injury
> claims and bank loans)? As an aside, 29% say they would take physics were it
> not compulsory - I'm pretty certain that 29% of students don't take physics
> to A-level when given the option...
> Phil, Oxford
>
> Surely 49% of children saying that science lessons are not boring,
> confusing or difficult is a great result, given that it has probably always
> been the norm for a percentage children to automatically say that school
> lessons are just that, just because that's what you are supposed to say if
> you don't want to get labelled as a nerdy goody two-shoes. I'm sure a lot of
> science teachers out there go to great lengths to try and inspire children
> despite the constraints of having to teach a pretty jammed curriculum... and
> after reports like this wonder why they bother. Go science teachers!
> Dug, Wimbledon, UK
>
> Well, I couldn't name either the "Dolly the Sheep" man or the head of
> the Beagle mission either, and I'm interested in and follow modern science!
> They just aren't pushed by the media as well-known names (the things they
> did are pushed, but not the people behind them). And of course they are too
> new to get into textbooks. When I did chemistry O-level in the early '70s we
> did a lot of practical work and it was interesting. Not the "social effects
> of chemistry", the real hands-on work. If that has been dropped in the name
> of 'safety' (none of the science pupils at my school got injured, at least
> when I was there!) it's not surprising that it has become dull and boring. I
> applaud "Vic, UK"'s attempt to go beyond the dry syllabus and hope he is
> rewarded for it (rather than punished for teaching something he's not
> supposed to teach).
> Chris C, Aylesbury, UK
>
> I am 18 and I have my A level exams starting on Monday in Biology,
> Chemistry, Physics and Maths. I love doing science subjects. Its great
> finding how things work. It can be dull at times but all subjects can be. I
> think what is needed is more entertaining science teachers in secondary
> schools.
> Michael Smith, South Shields, UK
>
> Science teaching should start with the v young as a sort of Natural
> Philosophy type thing so that 7-14 year olds would have a better
> understanding of themselves and the world around them. They would then have
> the tools to see through the pseudo science guff that is peddled to them
> Rob , Plymouth
>
> Typically it goes like this: in the main section, you get doomsayers
> using studies saying that we're not taking the risks of asteroid strikes, or
> drink-related health problems seriously enough. In the lifestyle section,
> there's another article telling you a glass of wine a day, or the latest
> fad, will help you live long into retirement. Until we get more sensible
> scientific journalism which doesn't just cherry pick the most sensationalist
> stories for their own commercial gain, but rather form a balanced view based
> on all the evidence available (isn't that the job of a journalist?), the
> general public's perception of the value of science, and interest in
> following it as a career, will continue to wane.
> James, London, UK
>
> It's never really been cool to like science
> Nikki , London, UK
>
> It's never really been cool to like science, most movies and TV shows
> always portray the nerds as science geeks - self image is always important
> at that age so it is difficult to admit it you like geeky subjects! My uni
> has a project where some of its researchers teach part time in schools to
> try and portray a more exciting image of science. It's fantastic to see the
> excitement and interest when students come and visit our "real" lab and take
> part in very basic experiments. Most school children want to know "what's
> the point?" to everything so to see science being carried out in real life
> situations not just in the class room, helps inspire them to think about it
> as a possible career and not just boring lessons to drop as soon as
> possible! If it is any comfort to Clara Kenyon, I think that when asked to
> name a famous scientist, my fellow PhD students and I would also fail to
> mention Ian Wilmut and Colin Pillinger and probably name one of those the
> school pupils did.
> Nikki , London, UK
>
> I was rather surprised to Clara Kenyon's surprise that people did not
> name recent scientists as famous ones. Is that at all likely? I'm a
> mathematics student, and know a fair amount of science, but if you ask me to
> name one I am more likely to pick a historical figure. After all, it is hard
> to tell who is going to be the most influential scientist when you are
> living in the time. I am not surprised at all by this figure. Yes, science
> is very interesting for those who get it, but to expect everyone to is to be
> unduly optimistic. I do think society would be better off with everyone
> having a better understanding of science, but some are just not meant to
> progress any further than that.
> Kieran Martin, Bath, UK
>
> Science is not as easy as some subjects thus less people want to study
> it. Science and engineering has been vital to this country and the world in
> the past and will be vital in the future. I would encourage the government
> to reduce the financial hurdles to home grown students in science and
> engineering in those areas crucial to the economy in which too few students
> are at present studying.
> Keith, London
>
> I'm not surprised. I like science and enjoyed it - completed two A
> levels and currently studying it at university. But when our teacher at A
> level said to us, in response to us saying the class was usually enjoyable,
> "Chemistry, isn't meant to be fun!", that really killed a lot of enjoyment
> in the subject. I think that's where some effort needs to be concentrated!
> Josh, London
>
> I teach GCSE physics and chemistry, having previously had a long
> career in science research. The children are right; the specifications for
> these subjects are tedious. The coursework is more difficult than an EU
> grant application! To make it interesting (and useful) I show them things
> that aren't in the proper course. Also, I think that any student who is
> naturally interested in science would look for other subjects because the
> GCSE is so uninspiring.
>
> For example, there's precious little real chemistry in the chemistry
> course. There's a great emphasis on safety - this should be taught
> separately - and on the 'usefulness' of chemistry in society! Chemistry
> should stand on its own feet. Lastly, we have academics complaining about
> the lack of scientists. Well, I can tell you that it starts here at GCSE.
> Incidentally, I already teach mobile phone technology, digital recording
> systems (CD players etc) and photography and some food science to relieve
> the monotony. And my lessons on safety are embellished with a career's
> experience of lab accidents! I could go on about job prospects in science..
> Vic, UK
>
> I am now coming to the end of a very long educational road - I'm
> finishing my PhD in chemistry this summer. Over the years I have been ever
> more unimpressed with the overall state of science education as I have seen
> more and more of the whole story. Science in schools is taught in a bitty,
> 'we can't do experiments in case we get sued way' resulting in a lack of
> inspiration for most pupils despite some amazing teachers out there. Also,
> this apathy I feel is indirectly affecting undergraduate science courses
> trying to make up for lost time.
> Richard, Birmingham, UK
>
> Science is difficult and complex - that's reality
> Sean Pea***, Bristol
>
> I'm a science teacher in Bristol and this survey does not surprise me.
> But that doesn't mean we need to try and "sell" science to the public and
> pupils. Science is difficult and complex - that's reality. Trying to pretend
> to make it anything less would be a lie. Pupils find it hard though because
> they cannot concentrate and engage in the information. Look at independent
> schools, why do they seem to be having success where state schools are not?
> State schools have made to many concessions on making science a more
> "accessible" subject.
> Sean Pea***, Bristol
>
> I graduated Royal Holloway with a degree in physics last year, and I
> can tell you why university level physics and chemistry is becoming less
> popular. It's because of the hundreds of degrees now available which require
> no academic ability and are simply seen as 'simple' or 'easy.' Degrees
> should be challenging academically, that's the very basis on which the
> university system is founded. If there's the option to do virtually no work
> and still emerge with a BA in Flower Arranging, a vast majority will take
> it, and the core subjects will lose out.
> Jason Richardson, High Wycombe, UK
>
> Once again dumbing down in our schools has made the headlines. If you
> want children interested in science exploit exciting science, such as the
> new A380 and the advanced materials and modelling techniques used in its
> construction or on the day we may decide to go into space remind kids that
> science made it possible. Also remind them that from the clothes they wear
> to the cars they drive in science made it all possible.
> Chris Smith, Reading, UK
>
> Whenever I see survey results that suggest "young people think Madonna
> is a scientist" or "British youth believes that Japan is a part of Europe" I
> always wonder whether the kids are just taking the mickey.
> Tamara, England
>
> So 49% of pupils don't think science lessons are boring, confusing or
> difficult? That's not a bad percentage for subjects that have long been
> associated with plaid shirts and pocket protectors. Hopefully the 16% of
> children that don't want to choose science as a vocation will go on to be
> musicians, artists, writers, bin men...
> Adam McGee, Griesheim
>
> How dreadful that something should be difficult. Mind you, in today's
> society it seems that reward for hard work is on the wane and popular films
> seem to delight in stereotyping science as being nerdy, so should we really
> be surprised at this?
> JB, Bristol, UK
>
> In 1974 when I started my O level courses Science was not compulsory.
> I never took any sciences, but most of my friends took one or more, I still
> ended up with a good education & 11 O' levels. This just shows that it is
> not just today's teenagers who will not a take science subject, there is
> always a certain percentage who back out.
> My daughter is currently taking GCSEs and loves biology and chemistry,
> but hates physics. I think its really unfair that as a result of this her
> grade will probably come down due to the fact that she will probably not get
> good results in physics (it is a double award). Why can't they choose
> science as separate subjects, if it has to be compulsory can't they have a
> choice, why all three?
> Sharon Kinge, Milton Keynes, Bucks
>
> In response to Sharon Kinge's comment, there does actually exist a
> triple science award, in which you take the three sciences separately, but
> not all schools offer this. When I did my GCSEs I did this and had the same
> thing but with Biology being my weaker subject. However, as I did them
> separately, I still got As in physics and chemistry, as well as a C in
> Biology. However, since then my old school has stopped offering the triple
> award, and all students must now do the double, which is ridiculous.
> James, Bristol
>
> Good grief? What is this? Pandering to the instant gratification
> generation? Pretty well all achievements in science have been through
> determination methodology and blind luck on an approx 50:50 mix. e.g the
> transistor (blood sweat and tears) and the telephone (blind luck). Nothing
> in science is easy. Then again who would want to be a scientist these days
> given the typical salaries in the UK for research assistants and tech staff.
> Prestige is one thing, being able to feed yourself and your family
> comfortably is another.
> Philip Copeland, Newry, Co. Down
>
> I think Philip Copeland has a point. It is difficult to keep up the
> enthusiasm for science when salaries are so low. Also, jobs are not easiest
> to find and are usually not permanent. This has not put me (or many others)
> off wanting to do it, but I can see why people may opt out and go down
> 'safer' routes.
> Tijana Blanusa, Reading
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 4. The Sunday Times - Review
>
> May 08, 2005
>
> Education: Science - in safe hands?
>
> Spider-hunting and blood sampling help to equip children
> for later life, says Sian Griffiths
>
> Will held his middle finger tightly and squeezed. The
> sterile lancet pierced his skin and a moment later a bead of blood oozed
> out. He smeared it onto a slide, slid it under a microscope and discovered,
> for the first time, that his blood group was AB+.
> Will, 15, may not realise it but he is one of a few
> children still able to do the kind of hands-on science that has been
> outlawed by red tape and safety fears in many schools.
>
> When Andrew Allott, Will's teacher at Shrewsbury school,
> posted a call in an e-mail discussion group for schools to reintroduce
> "blood practicals", his suggestion was greeted with remarks such as "mad"
> and "hope you're not sued".
>
> "No state schools are doing the blood experiment any
> more," he explains - it was banned a decade ago when worries about HIV
> infection were at their height.
>
> So when he decided to do it at Shrewsbury, a boys'
> boarding school, he felt like he was "putting his head on the block".
>
> But now it looks like Allott, a calm enthusiast who lets
> pupils handle tarantulas in his lab and takes them on trips to track rare
> species in the rainforests of Honduras, may yet have the last laugh.
>
> Boring, safe, anodyne science is switching kids off in
> their thousands: numbers on A-level science courses are falling, degree
> courses are unfilled, university chemistry departments are closing. If
> teachers can't do interesting experiments and lessons end up "with kids
> doing nothing but copying notes off the board, no surprise they are turned
> off science", says Allott.
>
> Finally, the powers that be are waking up to the problem.
>
> Last week Sir Digby Jones, director-general of the
> Confederation of British Industry warned head teachers that children must be
> allowed to take risks. Jones said his worries extended to the curtailment of
> the experiments and trips that made science fascinating.
>
> "As a nation we have got to make science interesting," he
> said, and turn out inquisitive children eager to explore if we want to
> compete economically and technologically in the future with countries such
> as India and China.
>
> Jones is in favour of fizzing test tubes and bangs in
> chemistry, the dissection of eyeballs and field trips to explore nature at
> first hand.
>
> "But if you are a science teacher who is told that if he
> takes a child out on a field trip he has to spend ages filling in forms and
> then - if a child does what comes naturally (God made them inquisitive) and
> there is a problem - you could be sued and might even end up in prison, why
> would you bother?" Allott knows first-hand just how much red tape there is.
> "The blood experiment took half a day of form filling, chats with the school
> doctor and permission slips to all parents," he said.
>
> "If you are setting up a day in the hills it might take
> one hour to assess the risks and fill in the forms. We have never not done
> something because of risk assessment," he says. "But I can imagine other
> schools thinking, 'Oh phooey, forget it'. Many schools now do not take kids
> off site."
>
> So how risky is it really? Not at all compared with the
> kind of adventures Allott had as a teenager at Atlantic college in south
> Wales - the ones that inspired him to spend his life teaching science. He
> talks blithely of days spent on the hills and of racing dinghies in the
> Bristol Channel.
>
> But now? Have any of his pupils ever had an accident? "No,
> no," he says. "Some years ago we were out on the hills in north Wales and a
> boy collapsed. He was unconscious for 40 minutes. We called the Sea King
> rescue helicopter and went with him to hospital."
>
> Nobody found out why he had collapsed; he was fine
> afterwards. As Allott says, the kids got to see what the RAF described as "a
> textbook response" to the incident.
>
> For, at the end of the day, life is full of risks and it's
> the children who have been taught to take them safely who will triumph.
>
> "I hope the tide will turn in favour of being able to do
> exciting things safely," says Allott, already pencilling in his next school
> outing: spider-hunting amid the peat bogs of an English Nature reserve in
> Shropshire.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 5. Young people are often turned off science
>
>
> One of the key challenges facing our schools today is how to inspire young
> people to be enthusiastic about science. Young people are often turned off
> science before they even start to think about how important it has been to
> our economic growth in the past, and how important it will be as we try to
> address some of the major challenges that face this country in the future.
> Environmental management is a key part of this future - how we manage our
> natural resources that sustain life on the planet and we need the brightest
> young minds to be turning their attention to these challenges if we are to
> find pathways to a sustainable future.
>
> For young people to be excited by science and by some of the scientific
> challenges Australia and the world face, they need to be taught by people
> who are able to communicate the excitement of science, the scientific
> process and the way science can help solve real problems. Young people need
> Œscientists as role models‚ :- they need to see that science can be fun,
> does make a difference and is a tool for change for the public good.
>
> The ŒTeach Live‚ pilot program is an innovative teaching opportunity
> supported by Earthwatch Australia through funding from the Cass Foundation.
> Four Victorian secondary science teachers will participate in two Australian
> scientific field research projects from May 22 to June 4, 2004, and during
> this time will communicate their scientific field experience back to their
> students.
>
> The program has been designed to:
>
> a.. bring the excitement of scientific field research into the classroom
> linking Earthwatch scientists and teachers with students on-line.
> b.. provide teachers with intensive training in scientific fieldwork,
> conservation and the use of new technologies.
> c.. promote collaboration among science teachers from different schools as
> classrooms participate jointly in Œvirtual‚ expeditions
> In pairs the teachers will join a team of international volunteers from
> around the globe to assist scientists with their research. The four teachers
> aim to bring the excitement of scientific field research into their
> classrooms via the internet, email, and satelitte communication.
>
> Elena Nisiforou (Glen Waverley Secondary College) and Angela Ettles (South
> Oakleigh College) will participate in the Echidnas and Goannas of Kangaroo
> Island research project.
>
> Mark McTier (McKinnon Secondary College) and Cathy Nelson (Princes Hill
> Secondary College) will participate in the Rainforests of Northern Australia
> research project in far north Queensland.
>
> In the lead up to the fieldwork commencing the four teachers have been busy
> developing lesson plans and activities relating to the research project they
> will be involved with. The aim has been to integrate the research project
> into the school program, engaging not only their own students but other
> teachers and their students as well. The ŒTeach Live‚ initiative will
> involve students from science, environmental science and geography classes
> from Years 7 - 11.
>
> After working all day in the field the teachers will write a daily journal
> about their fieldwork, including photographs, which will be uploaded to
> their website for their students to see. Students will be able to ask their
> teachers questions about their daily activities, the scientific research and
> conservation issues. The website will be an up-to-date bulletin for students
> teachers and the wider school community to read about what their teachers
> are doing on their projects.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> 6. No antidote to science phobia
>
> STUDENTS are being turned off science in their droves - but the reason
> remains a mystery.
>
> This year physics saw the biggest drop in numbers with 3% fewer pupils doing
> the exam. Chemistry saw a drop off of 1.5% and biology of 0.8%.
>
> So why is the white lab coat so uncool?
>
> Heather Guy, acting head teacher at Whitchurch High School in Cardiff,
> explained that sciences - along with maths - are perceived by students to be
> that much harder.
>
> 'Students are looking to get the top grades and so feel they are more likely
> to get them in subjects like media or the arts. It is a perception rather
> than a reality, but that has an impact and young people tend to go for
> subjects they are more likely to get an A or B in.'
>
> Mrs Guy explained one consequence of a shortage in any subject would be felt
> only too severely in teaching, where there is already a shortage in a number
> of subjects, something the National Assembly has tried to address by
> offering financial incentives.
>
> Prof Richard Joyner, chair of Save British Science, and dean of research and
> graduate studies at Nottingham Trent University, would love to know the
> reason behind the fall in interest in science. But he explained it is a
> trend that is being seen all over western Europe.
>
> 'I don't think anyone is terribly sure why that is. One possible reason is
> that kids tend to hold science responsible for environmental damage,' he
> explained.
>
> With opposition to the MMR jab, BSE, cloning and GM crops all having hit the
> headlines, Prof Joyner said that science 'may have had a bad press'.
>
> 'It's certainly true of society that we take all of the benefits of science
> for granted.'
>
> Should the trend continue, however, Prof Joyner warned that the UK will find
> it increasingly difficult to compete in different markets, because so much
> industry around the world depended on science and technology.
>
> Story from REDNOVA NEWS
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

.