- Email: [email protected]
Some aspects of science education in Britain: a comparative study
Some aspects of science education in Britain: a comparative study C. C. Butler This article gives a broad picture of science education in Britain, starting with school pupils of about 11 years of age and concluding at the Ph.D. level. In the main it considers the education system from the point of view of students preparing for professional scientific work in basic and applied research as well as those who will leave the system at first degree level for a variety of occupations, ranging from school teaching to development and marketing posts in industry. The article is not directly concerned with the education and training of engineers and technologists. The British system is compared briefly with the educational patterns of several western European countries and the USA. Science
in
the
schools
In recent years the secondary school system in Britain has undergone profound changes arising from the rapid adoption of comprehensive secondary education. The public examination system, however, has remained fairly static in basic structure for the last 25 years, although individual science syllabuses have changed a great deal. In England and Wales General Certificate of Education (GCE) ‘0’ levels (or Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE)) are usually taken at 16+, and ‘A’ levels at 18 +. The school examination system in Scotland differs appreciably from this pattern, particularly in the 16+ to 18+ age range, but in view of the relatively stable examination structure, we can avoid discussing the details of school organisation and consider, first of all, the curriculum which leads to the public examinations at 16 + Science education at primary level (5511 years) rarely goes much further than nature study; although a number of curriculum development programmes for primary science courses have been undertaken, their uptake has not been very marked. Pupils are usually introduced to serious science at the age of 11, but only about three lessons a week are given and topics from both the physical and biological sciences are included. The main individual science subjects of physics, chemistry, and biology are not usually taught as such until pupils are ‘13 or 14; that is, two or three years before the important 16+ examinations. This transition presents a very significant problem since a pupil usually faces the necessity of making a choice of how many sciences to study. If the physical sciences are dropped at 13 or 14 and only biological science is taken, a situation which is common for girls, then these pupils are unlikely to study science in the sixth forms. Boys often take two physical sciences but not biology. This very unsatisfactory state of affairs has been known for a long time; see for example, the work of G. A. Barnard and M. D. McCreath (1970) [l]. Very recently (January 1977) the Science Inspectors reported 127 the following preliminary figures drawn from 50 schools:4th Number science
subjects studied
pupils
Boys
Girls
3 2
13 31
1
50
12 19 56
percentages
C. C. Butler,
secondary
(usually 15+) percentages
6
0 The
year
of
for
B.Sc.,
the
Ph.D.,
5th
year
pupils
13 were
similar.
F.R.S.
Was born in 1922 and is a graduate of Reading University. He was professor of physics in Manchester University and Imperial College London before being appointed Director of the Nuffield Foundanon in 1970. He is currently Vice-chancellor of Loughborough University of Technology. He has long had a keen interest in scrence education and has been a member of the University Grants Committee and the Schools Council; he is chairman of the Royal Society’s Education Committee.
It is possible that a few of the ‘one science subject’ pupils study physics, and if they are good at mathematics, too, then this could be a basis for a subsequent career in mathematics, physics, and some branches of engineering. However, many of the ‘one science subject’ pupils study biology or azomposite subject-‘general science’, etc.-which are inadequate as a preparation for future scientific studies. Consequently these figures mean that about half the young people in Britain effectively forfeit the opportunity of science-based careers at about 13 years of age. This regrettable situation comes about because most school curricula for the age range 13-16 are built out of 8 subjects. Mathematics and English Language are studied by everyone. If room is to be found for History, Geography, one or two foreign languages and English Literature, then there is only room for one, or perhaps two, sciences. In practice, a few able pupils cope with ten subjects up to 16+, perhaps taking the ‘0’ level examinations in two steps, say 2 at 15+ and the remaining 8 at 16+. These exceptional pupils can readily include three sciences and a sufficient spread of other subjects to give them the possibility of studying either arts subjects, social science subjects, or mathematics and experimental science in the sixth(top) fo
project, I feel that this modernisation of science syllabuses has made them more difficult than they were in the 1950s: this conclusion applies particularly to physics and chemistry. Indeed, I take the view that physics and chemistry are the most difficult of all the ‘0’ level courses which may, in part, explain why about half the pupils are reluctant to take more than one science course. The Nuffield Foundation has also introduced a much less rigorous secondary science project for pupils not aiming as high as ‘0’ levels. Most students who pursue their studies beyond the statutory school leaving age of 16 take two-year courses in schools or colleges. The present curriculum pattern in England and Wales is for three main subjects to be studied, although a minority of able students will take four subjects and some may take only one or two. The latter will usually be continuing some ‘0’ level studies in order to obtain the five or six passes which are necessary for many careers. The limitation to three main subjects presents serious problems of choice for many students. Nowadays a mixture of artsbased and science-based subjects is popular, but if students make this choice then they will probably not be able to follow a science or technology degree course at a university or polytechnic. Mathematics is often taken together with arts or social science subjects and this forms a very effective combination. Students with a main interest in the physical sciences usually take mathematics, physics, and chemistry as a basis for degree work in physical sciences, mathematics, most engineering subjects, and medicine. If biology is studied in the sixth form, it will often be in combination with mathematics and chemistry. The Nuffield Foundation programme has been extended to ‘A’ levels in physics, chemistry, biology, and physical science (effectively physics and chemistry integrated into a single subject). As with the ‘0’ levels, only a minority of students follow the Nuffield programmes but the new philosophy has profoundly affected almost all the current science syllabuses. Again, it is virtually impossible to define the standard achieved at 18+, but undoubtedly it is high compared with corresponding achievements at the same age in other countries. In Scotland, pupils do not take ‘A’ levels but Scottish Higher Certificates at 17+ in five subjects. They may then take a further certificate at 18 + although this forms no part of the entry qualification for the four-year honours degree courses in Scottish universities. One of the main difficulties that has to be faced when constructing an ‘A’ level syllabus in, say, physics is that it has to serve a very wide variety of purposes. Only a small minority of the pupils will go on to take a degree in physics. The majority will need the subject as a preparation for studies in another science, for engineering or medicine, or they may be thinking of leaving the education system at 18 + and so it may be a terminal course. Thus the syllabus has to be comprehensive, and consequently most physics syllabuses now include many topics which 15 years ago would have been found only in degree courses. Inevitably this means that the school treatment is rather superficial and leads to the belief that standards have fallen because pupils are not so well drilled in basic concepts as they used to be. Some people, particularly engineers, are pressing for more applications to be taught in school. If carried too far this laudable request could lead to a further lowering of content knowledge. As is so often the case in education, compromises have to be effected but, so far, we may not have achieved the best balance between basic topics and applications in our science syllabuses. Science
in
the
universities
About half of all British university students on degree courses have specialised in science between 16 and 18 + Of the sciencebased university students about half are in science faculties and half follow vocational courses, for example, in medicine, engineering, technology, etc. Science degree courses in England 130
and Wales are predominantly of three years’ duration; in Scotland it is traditionally four. A wide variety of subjects can be studied but, as at school, the main ones are physics, chemistry, and biology. In addition, joint honours courses can be taken usually involving two science subjects. The prestigious single-subject degree has many variants. For example, some institutions provide a broadly based science course during the first year in which three or four subjects may be studied separately or integrated in some way. The second year will concentrate more time on the main subject area than is the case in the first year, and the final year will be devoted exclusively to the main subject but will include elective subjects, mostly within the same area. An alternative approach favoured by some departments is to start on specialised teaching in the first year, usually with appropriate mathematics courses, and to continue on this pattern for the second year. A wide variety of choices can then be offered in the third year. This may allow some students to move the emphasis of their studies into the grey areas between traditional subject areas; for example, physics moving into electronic engineering or into the earth sciences, etc. Effective interdisciplinary studies can take place in this way. Many of the traditional departments in the biological area have merged into schools of biological science either keeping their identities or, in some instances, losing them completely. Biology degrees are often broadly based for the first year, but encourage specialist interests in the later years. A number of very new science degree courses have been introduced, mainly of an interdisciplinary character; for example, in the environmental science area and in human biology. Some applied science degrees are offered which differ in philosophy from courses in engineering and technology. Some of these courses involve industrial experience and are of four years’ duration. However, the main thrust of applied studies is not within the science departments. During the last ten years science degree courses have been subject to considerable criticism. Many people feel that they are unduly oriented towards the interests of basic science and provide insufficient introduction to the problems of the real world and insufficient vocational training. Do university science teachers concentrate unduly on preparing the best students for research careers? Would it not be better to include many more applications of science within the degree courses? Questions such as these can be debated endlessly, and there are no agreed answers. Fortunately, we have a very wide variety of courses in Britain, so students who take the necessary trouble can usually find courses to suit their inclinations. Nevertheless, I feel that basic science courses attract too many of the high quality students, a view which is widely held in industry. The answer to this difficulty may be found if new applied courses are planned in conjunction with industry, and if industry overtly encourages students to participate and provides attractive career prospects. The standard of achievement in British honours degrees is very high, and has probably been maintained during the rapid expansion of provision for degree courses over the last fifteen years or so. However, it is impossible to monitor standards precisely, and to conduct experiments on the value of new curricula with rigorous evaluation. In the end, we are very dependent on the opinions of teachers, examiners, and employers. My personal belief is that quality has been maintained within the top half of the class lists, but I am less certain about the .situation in the lower half. Indeed, I take the view about my own subject of physics that there has been unwarranted inflation in the demands made on students. Syllabuses tend to be overloaded and very severe pressures are placed on young people aiming for high honours. This inflation has come about because so many additions have been made to courses without counterbalancing deletions. This is a general area of concern for all science courses at school and degree levels. The majority of science degree courses in Britain are aimed at preparing students for a wide variety of careers. Some years
ago the majority hoped for research and development jobs and only a few were prepared to go into school teaching. Basically, this explains why Britain has been chronically short of science teachers, particularly in physics and mathematics. Nowadays, increasing numbers of students perceive a science degree as an introduction to a very wide variety of careers not directly related to their science discipline. On a long term basis this is a very welcome development: it is common for commentators to say, for example, that students are being educated through chemistry rather than in chemistry. Despite this important realisation, the recruiting of science students is still influenced a good deal by the attitudes of science-based industry and their short-term recruiting policy. Unfortunately, a major company’s public statements about the short-term need for people such as chemists can have very long-term effects on the supply position. However, large companies seem to have accepted that this is indeed the way in which our complex educational system reacts to stimuli, and are now planning their recruiting on a more even year-by-year basis than was the case some years ago. A small fraction of science graduates, but predominantly the better ones, remain in universities for postgraduate studies. The number of taught courses in science leading to a Master’s (M.Sc) degree has tended to diminish in recent years. The various Research Councils continue to support vocationally oriented Master’s courses which supplement a basic scientific training with very specialised knowledge about the applications of particular scientific discoveries. In 197.5/6 only 228 Advanced Course studentships were awarded by the Chemistry, Physics and Biological Sciences Committees of the Science Research Council (SRC) compared with 279 in mathematics, and about 700 in applied science, engineering, and technological subjects. The Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) course has long been the keystone of postgraduate education in science. The duration of the course is commonly at least three years but two-year Ph.Ds are not unknown in some universities, and in many individual cases four years of full-time work are required to complete a Ph.D. In 1972/3 about 2200 Ph.D. degrees were awarded to science students in Britain, and about 700 in engineering. These numbers are roughly 16 and 10 per cent respectively of the first degree graduates in science and engineering three years earlier and together they amount to about 0.35 per cent of a single year age group of the population. In 1967/7 the SRC supported about 5800 research studentships, of which about 3600 were in science subjects, 470 in mathematics, and 1750 in applied science and engineering subject areas. In recent years the SRC has been sensitive to continuing criticisms of the Ph.D. course and during 1975 a Working Party [3] reconsidered all aspects of the Council’s policy in this area, and subsequently the Council decided to accept a few of the main recommendations. The problem of encouraging more research in the applied science and engineering areas at the expense of basic science remains, as does the problem of attracting a reasonable share of the ablest students into this area. Science western
education countries
in
Britain
compared
with
some
other
The secondary school patterns of education found in the iarger western European countries and in the U.S.A. arc very difierent from the British pattern. The European systems tend to be more complicated, and have been undergoing radical changes during the last few years. The reader who requires more detailed information than is given in the following paragraphs will find it in some recent publications [4-61. The French education system has become largely comprehensive up to the age of 15, but at that point the structural unity is given up. Many pupils enter technical college at 15, and thence to employment after courses of one: two, or three years’ duration. The lye& requires a three-year course for entry to higher or further education, and there will be some pupils
who stay in lower secondary education until they reach 16 and enter employment. Although the system lays considerable emphasis on technical education, the individual courses continue to be broadly based throughout their duration. Undoubtedly subject choices have to be made by young lycde students but subjects like French language and mathematics are studied right up to the haccalaur&t stage. This is in very sharp contrast to British practice, in which considerable numbers of students abandon studies of English and mathematics at 16. The situation in West Germany is broadly similar to that in France. Technical education has been extended and the curricula of the orthodox Gyrnnasierz have been reshaped. In addition, a number of new types of Gyrmasien have been introduced, either as self-contained schools or linked to the orthodox Gymnasien. A wide variety of specialism is available in these upper secondary schools. In the school year 197617 a new curriculum for Gym7zasie7Tcame into operation, but it is too early to say how it is working. In this, there is a common core of studies for all pupils (including at least three periods a week devoted to German, mathematics, and foreign languages) which amounts to about two-thirds of the curriculum. The remainder is available for special subjects which may involve more advanced study of core subjects or may be new subjects. The Abitur will be awarded on the basis of the work of the final two years on the common core and the special subjects, and the results of terminal examinations. A complex grading scheme is being introduced which may well raise serious problems. Dr A. G. Hearnden tells me that this is a sensitive area, because the number of entries to many university courses is limited and high grades in the Ahitur will be needed for admission to some courses. This situation is well known and accepted in Britain, but this is not so in West Germany. It is difficult to assess the standards achieved in, say, mathematics by all successful candidates for the Abitur. From conversations with young people who have taught English in German schools I have formed the impression that the standard is above ‘0’ level but is, of course, less than ‘A’ level. The specialist science for the Abitur is also likely to involve less material than British ‘A’ levels, but the intellectual standard may well be considerably above ‘0’ level. The school pattern in the U.S.A. is broadly compatible with the European patterns already described. the terminal examination is really a school record or profile of the student showing all the courses taken and the individual grades received. For post-school studies there is a wide variety of public and private institutions, ranging from those which are non-selective to those which are highly selective and have special entrance assessment procedures. Some institutions use their their own tests, while others use the facilities of the College Entrance Examination Board and the American College Testing Program. First degree courses also show considerable variations between countries. The majority of courses in England and Wales are at least one year shorter than those on the Continent and in the U.S.A. Again, there is no objective way of comparing standards achieved in main subjects. At one time it was commonly believed that American first degrees were hardly more advanced than British ‘A’ levels. Today, first degrees in science at prestigious American universities are probably of about the same standard as honours degrees in Britain. The Ph.D. degree in science, or its equivalent in some European countries, has come to have an international status. In Britain, many successful candidates are aged 24-26 while in the U.S.A. and Europe they are often aged about 26-30. Hitherto, most British Ph.D. students have studied and researched full-time, while part-time Ph.D. programmes are more common in other countries. The standards achieved in Britain and at the more distinguished graduate schools in the U.S.A. are closely comparable. The Royal Institute of Chemistry has recently reported on a survey in America on the acceptability of the British Ph.D. and, in the main, the conclusions are very favourable. Perhaps the main difference between the two sys131
terns is to be found in the American insistence on a considerable component of assessed course work in their Ph.D. courses. In some sciences, notably physics and mathematics, this practice is followed in Britain, although the courses are not usually examined thoroughly. The Science Research Council has expressed itself to be in favour of encouraging graduate course work in order to broaden the range of a student’s understanding of his own and related subject areas. This particular recommendation is not so strongly supported by many university scientists, who prefer to put more emphasis on research achievements than is often the case in the U.S.A. My personal view is that we achieve a very high Ph.D. standard in science in Britain at a slightly earlier age than elsewhere. To what extent this depends on our specialist science education between 16 and 18 at school and the single-honours degree is a matter for debate.
Possible
developments
in science
education
in Britain
For some years now I have been urging that school education should be planned to delay significant choices for further study later than is the case at present. Ideally, I would like to see all secondary pupils following comprehensive but adequate science courses up to 16+. I do not believe that these courses can be planned effectively to allow a very wide ability range to be taught simultaneously. The real problem is how much time can be allocated for this programme in the 13-16 age range. Sadly, I do not believe sufficient time can be found for all pupils to do three sciences and for the top ability group to tackle three ‘0’ levels. Some time ago the Schools Council developed an integrated science programme (SCISP) occupying the time of two ‘0’ levels; this was intended to prepare pupils for any of the main ‘A’ level science courses. The programme works well, but has not proved very popular with teachers. Perhaps we need a programme in which three sciences are kept separate, but the overall teaching time is only that corresponding to two ‘0’ levels. Inevitably subject content will be reduced, which raises problems. Also there is pressure from engineers for ‘0’ level science programmes to contain more everyday applications of science than is the case now. If this were done, and the teaching time reduced too, undoubtedly the basic conceptual content of the courses will be reduced appreciably. This dilemma has to be faced if premature specialisation is to be avoided. Personally, I would give the very highest priority to achieving this goal even if it means conceding some content in courses. Since 1964 the Schools Council has been considering revising the sixth form curriculum and the examination at 18 + Several plans for broadening the curriculum have been proposed but subsequently rejected. At present a scheme for a five-subject curriculum is being considered, in which subjects would be available at two levels, the Normal (N) and Further (F) levels. Aspirants to degree courses would be expected to study five subjects, possibly three being at N-level and two at the higher F-level. This scheme is based on proposals made in 1973 by a Schools Council and Universities’ Joint Working Party. [7]. Preparations are now being made for a new report on possible N and F syllabuses and grading arrangements. A new scheme
Endeavour, (Pergamon
132
New Series Volume 1. No. 314. 1977 Press. Printed in Great Britain)
of this kind could not be introduced in England and Wales before the mid-1980s. I support this kind of development, although I would give higher priority to achieving a balanced curriculum for all up to 16+. It is worth noting that, since its introduction in 1970, the lntevnational BaccalaurPat (IB) has gained wide acceptance. This system is a six subject curriculum with each subject available at two levels; normally three subjects are studied at each level. The mother tongue, a second language, mathematics, and a science form a compulsory core of studies. One subject must be chosen from history, geography, economics, philosophy, etc. and the remaining one from languages, further mathematics, sciences, art, music, etc. Personally, I believe the existing English and Welsh systems of ‘A’ levels must soon move closer to Scottish and European practices and the proposed five-subject N and F levels does just this. If the N and F pattern for upper secondary education is introduced in Britain, degree courses will have to be revised. Many university scientists and engineers deplore this and feel that degree standards will be unduly eroded. I do not myself think that an N and F scheme would itself render four-year undergraduate programmes essential, but there is already evidence that existing first degree science courses are overloaded. Consequently, I can see a good case being made for four-year courses from, say, 1985 onwards. The size of the 18 + age group in Britain will be falling then, and so universities may be able to cope fairly readily with longer degree courses. Alternatively, we should accept an appreciable lowering of first degree standards but make provision for some students-perhaps about half-to extend first degree courses prior to starting postgraduate courses or entering employment. No doubt science degree courses will be revised in many ways dui-ing the next ten years. Much needs to be done in the applied science area and in the preparation of science students for employment in industry. Developments of this nature will require more active collaboration of industry with educational institutions than is usually the case at present. In conclusion, it can be maintained that science education in schools and in higher education institutions is maintaining high standards in Britain in times of serious financial stringency. Many changes will be needed in the future but I believe the system has the resilience to respond. References
[l] [Z] [3] [4] [S] [6] [7]
Barnard, G. A. and McCreath, M. D. J. R. J/. R. statist. Sot. 133, Series A, pt 3, 358, 1970. Mathematics, Science and Modern Languages in Maintained Schools in England-an Appraisal of Problems in some Key Subjects’. H.M. Inspectorate, London. 1977. ‘Postgraduate Training’. SRC Working Party Report, London. 1975. Hearnden, A. G. ‘Preparation, Assessment and Selection for University’. Schools Council, London. 1970. Idem. ‘Education, Culture and Politics in West Germany’. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 1976. Halls, W. D. ‘Education, Culture and Politics in Modem France’. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 1976. ‘Preparation for Degree Courses’. Working Paper 47. Schools Council, London. 1973.
in
the
schools
In recent years the secondary school system in Britain has undergone profound changes arising from the rapid adoption of comprehensive secondary education. The public examination system, however, has remained fairly static in basic structure for the last 25 years, although individual science syllabuses have changed a great deal. In England and Wales General Certificate of Education (GCE) ‘0’ levels (or Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE)) are usually taken at 16+, and ‘A’ levels at 18 +. The school examination system in Scotland differs appreciably from this pattern, particularly in the 16+ to 18+ age range, but in view of the relatively stable examination structure, we can avoid discussing the details of school organisation and consider, first of all, the curriculum which leads to the public examinations at 16 + Science education at primary level (5511 years) rarely goes much further than nature study; although a number of curriculum development programmes for primary science courses have been undertaken, their uptake has not been very marked. Pupils are usually introduced to serious science at the age of 11, but only about three lessons a week are given and topics from both the physical and biological sciences are included. The main individual science subjects of physics, chemistry, and biology are not usually taught as such until pupils are ‘13 or 14; that is, two or three years before the important 16+ examinations. This transition presents a very significant problem since a pupil usually faces the necessity of making a choice of how many sciences to study. If the physical sciences are dropped at 13 or 14 and only biological science is taken, a situation which is common for girls, then these pupils are unlikely to study science in the sixth forms. Boys often take two physical sciences but not biology. This very unsatisfactory state of affairs has been known for a long time; see for example, the work of G. A. Barnard and M. D. McCreath (1970) [l]. Very recently (January 1977) the Science Inspectors reported 127 the following preliminary figures drawn from 50 schools:4th Number science
subjects studied
pupils
Boys
Girls
3 2
13 31
1
50
12 19 56
percentages
C. C. Butler,
secondary
(usually 15+) percentages
6
0 The
year
of
for
B.Sc.,
the
Ph.D.,
5th
year
pupils
13 were
similar.
F.R.S.
Was born in 1922 and is a graduate of Reading University. He was professor of physics in Manchester University and Imperial College London before being appointed Director of the Nuffield Foundanon in 1970. He is currently Vice-chancellor of Loughborough University of Technology. He has long had a keen interest in scrence education and has been a member of the University Grants Committee and the Schools Council; he is chairman of the Royal Society’s Education Committee.
It is possible that a few of the ‘one science subject’ pupils study physics, and if they are good at mathematics, too, then this could be a basis for a subsequent career in mathematics, physics, and some branches of engineering. However, many of the ‘one science subject’ pupils study biology or azomposite subject-‘general science’, etc.-which are inadequate as a preparation for future scientific studies. Consequently these figures mean that about half the young people in Britain effectively forfeit the opportunity of science-based careers at about 13 years of age. This regrettable situation comes about because most school curricula for the age range 13-16 are built out of 8 subjects. Mathematics and English Language are studied by everyone. If room is to be found for History, Geography, one or two foreign languages and English Literature, then there is only room for one, or perhaps two, sciences. In practice, a few able pupils cope with ten subjects up to 16+, perhaps taking the ‘0’ level examinations in two steps, say 2 at 15+ and the remaining 8 at 16+. These exceptional pupils can readily include three sciences and a sufficient spread of other subjects to give them the possibility of studying either arts subjects, social science subjects, or mathematics and experimental science in the sixth(top) fo
project, I feel that this modernisation of science syllabuses has made them more difficult than they were in the 1950s: this conclusion applies particularly to physics and chemistry. Indeed, I take the view that physics and chemistry are the most difficult of all the ‘0’ level courses which may, in part, explain why about half the pupils are reluctant to take more than one science course. The Nuffield Foundation has also introduced a much less rigorous secondary science project for pupils not aiming as high as ‘0’ levels. Most students who pursue their studies beyond the statutory school leaving age of 16 take two-year courses in schools or colleges. The present curriculum pattern in England and Wales is for three main subjects to be studied, although a minority of able students will take four subjects and some may take only one or two. The latter will usually be continuing some ‘0’ level studies in order to obtain the five or six passes which are necessary for many careers. The limitation to three main subjects presents serious problems of choice for many students. Nowadays a mixture of artsbased and science-based subjects is popular, but if students make this choice then they will probably not be able to follow a science or technology degree course at a university or polytechnic. Mathematics is often taken together with arts or social science subjects and this forms a very effective combination. Students with a main interest in the physical sciences usually take mathematics, physics, and chemistry as a basis for degree work in physical sciences, mathematics, most engineering subjects, and medicine. If biology is studied in the sixth form, it will often be in combination with mathematics and chemistry. The Nuffield Foundation programme has been extended to ‘A’ levels in physics, chemistry, biology, and physical science (effectively physics and chemistry integrated into a single subject). As with the ‘0’ levels, only a minority of students follow the Nuffield programmes but the new philosophy has profoundly affected almost all the current science syllabuses. Again, it is virtually impossible to define the standard achieved at 18+, but undoubtedly it is high compared with corresponding achievements at the same age in other countries. In Scotland, pupils do not take ‘A’ levels but Scottish Higher Certificates at 17+ in five subjects. They may then take a further certificate at 18 + although this forms no part of the entry qualification for the four-year honours degree courses in Scottish universities. One of the main difficulties that has to be faced when constructing an ‘A’ level syllabus in, say, physics is that it has to serve a very wide variety of purposes. Only a small minority of the pupils will go on to take a degree in physics. The majority will need the subject as a preparation for studies in another science, for engineering or medicine, or they may be thinking of leaving the education system at 18 + and so it may be a terminal course. Thus the syllabus has to be comprehensive, and consequently most physics syllabuses now include many topics which 15 years ago would have been found only in degree courses. Inevitably this means that the school treatment is rather superficial and leads to the belief that standards have fallen because pupils are not so well drilled in basic concepts as they used to be. Some people, particularly engineers, are pressing for more applications to be taught in school. If carried too far this laudable request could lead to a further lowering of content knowledge. As is so often the case in education, compromises have to be effected but, so far, we may not have achieved the best balance between basic topics and applications in our science syllabuses. Science
in
the
universities
About half of all British university students on degree courses have specialised in science between 16 and 18 + Of the sciencebased university students about half are in science faculties and half follow vocational courses, for example, in medicine, engineering, technology, etc. Science degree courses in England 130
and Wales are predominantly of three years’ duration; in Scotland it is traditionally four. A wide variety of subjects can be studied but, as at school, the main ones are physics, chemistry, and biology. In addition, joint honours courses can be taken usually involving two science subjects. The prestigious single-subject degree has many variants. For example, some institutions provide a broadly based science course during the first year in which three or four subjects may be studied separately or integrated in some way. The second year will concentrate more time on the main subject area than is the case in the first year, and the final year will be devoted exclusively to the main subject but will include elective subjects, mostly within the same area. An alternative approach favoured by some departments is to start on specialised teaching in the first year, usually with appropriate mathematics courses, and to continue on this pattern for the second year. A wide variety of choices can then be offered in the third year. This may allow some students to move the emphasis of their studies into the grey areas between traditional subject areas; for example, physics moving into electronic engineering or into the earth sciences, etc. Effective interdisciplinary studies can take place in this way. Many of the traditional departments in the biological area have merged into schools of biological science either keeping their identities or, in some instances, losing them completely. Biology degrees are often broadly based for the first year, but encourage specialist interests in the later years. A number of very new science degree courses have been introduced, mainly of an interdisciplinary character; for example, in the environmental science area and in human biology. Some applied science degrees are offered which differ in philosophy from courses in engineering and technology. Some of these courses involve industrial experience and are of four years’ duration. However, the main thrust of applied studies is not within the science departments. During the last ten years science degree courses have been subject to considerable criticism. Many people feel that they are unduly oriented towards the interests of basic science and provide insufficient introduction to the problems of the real world and insufficient vocational training. Do university science teachers concentrate unduly on preparing the best students for research careers? Would it not be better to include many more applications of science within the degree courses? Questions such as these can be debated endlessly, and there are no agreed answers. Fortunately, we have a very wide variety of courses in Britain, so students who take the necessary trouble can usually find courses to suit their inclinations. Nevertheless, I feel that basic science courses attract too many of the high quality students, a view which is widely held in industry. The answer to this difficulty may be found if new applied courses are planned in conjunction with industry, and if industry overtly encourages students to participate and provides attractive career prospects. The standard of achievement in British honours degrees is very high, and has probably been maintained during the rapid expansion of provision for degree courses over the last fifteen years or so. However, it is impossible to monitor standards precisely, and to conduct experiments on the value of new curricula with rigorous evaluation. In the end, we are very dependent on the opinions of teachers, examiners, and employers. My personal belief is that quality has been maintained within the top half of the class lists, but I am less certain about the .situation in the lower half. Indeed, I take the view about my own subject of physics that there has been unwarranted inflation in the demands made on students. Syllabuses tend to be overloaded and very severe pressures are placed on young people aiming for high honours. This inflation has come about because so many additions have been made to courses without counterbalancing deletions. This is a general area of concern for all science courses at school and degree levels. The majority of science degree courses in Britain are aimed at preparing students for a wide variety of careers. Some years
ago the majority hoped for research and development jobs and only a few were prepared to go into school teaching. Basically, this explains why Britain has been chronically short of science teachers, particularly in physics and mathematics. Nowadays, increasing numbers of students perceive a science degree as an introduction to a very wide variety of careers not directly related to their science discipline. On a long term basis this is a very welcome development: it is common for commentators to say, for example, that students are being educated through chemistry rather than in chemistry. Despite this important realisation, the recruiting of science students is still influenced a good deal by the attitudes of science-based industry and their short-term recruiting policy. Unfortunately, a major company’s public statements about the short-term need for people such as chemists can have very long-term effects on the supply position. However, large companies seem to have accepted that this is indeed the way in which our complex educational system reacts to stimuli, and are now planning their recruiting on a more even year-by-year basis than was the case some years ago. A small fraction of science graduates, but predominantly the better ones, remain in universities for postgraduate studies. The number of taught courses in science leading to a Master’s (M.Sc) degree has tended to diminish in recent years. The various Research Councils continue to support vocationally oriented Master’s courses which supplement a basic scientific training with very specialised knowledge about the applications of particular scientific discoveries. In 197.5/6 only 228 Advanced Course studentships were awarded by the Chemistry, Physics and Biological Sciences Committees of the Science Research Council (SRC) compared with 279 in mathematics, and about 700 in applied science, engineering, and technological subjects. The Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) course has long been the keystone of postgraduate education in science. The duration of the course is commonly at least three years but two-year Ph.Ds are not unknown in some universities, and in many individual cases four years of full-time work are required to complete a Ph.D. In 1972/3 about 2200 Ph.D. degrees were awarded to science students in Britain, and about 700 in engineering. These numbers are roughly 16 and 10 per cent respectively of the first degree graduates in science and engineering three years earlier and together they amount to about 0.35 per cent of a single year age group of the population. In 1967/7 the SRC supported about 5800 research studentships, of which about 3600 were in science subjects, 470 in mathematics, and 1750 in applied science and engineering subject areas. In recent years the SRC has been sensitive to continuing criticisms of the Ph.D. course and during 1975 a Working Party [3] reconsidered all aspects of the Council’s policy in this area, and subsequently the Council decided to accept a few of the main recommendations. The problem of encouraging more research in the applied science and engineering areas at the expense of basic science remains, as does the problem of attracting a reasonable share of the ablest students into this area. Science western
education countries
in
Britain
compared
with
some
other
The secondary school patterns of education found in the iarger western European countries and in the U.S.A. arc very difierent from the British pattern. The European systems tend to be more complicated, and have been undergoing radical changes during the last few years. The reader who requires more detailed information than is given in the following paragraphs will find it in some recent publications [4-61. The French education system has become largely comprehensive up to the age of 15, but at that point the structural unity is given up. Many pupils enter technical college at 15, and thence to employment after courses of one: two, or three years’ duration. The lye& requires a three-year course for entry to higher or further education, and there will be some pupils
who stay in lower secondary education until they reach 16 and enter employment. Although the system lays considerable emphasis on technical education, the individual courses continue to be broadly based throughout their duration. Undoubtedly subject choices have to be made by young lycde students but subjects like French language and mathematics are studied right up to the haccalaur&t stage. This is in very sharp contrast to British practice, in which considerable numbers of students abandon studies of English and mathematics at 16. The situation in West Germany is broadly similar to that in France. Technical education has been extended and the curricula of the orthodox Gyrnnasierz have been reshaped. In addition, a number of new types of Gyrmasien have been introduced, either as self-contained schools or linked to the orthodox Gymnasien. A wide variety of specialism is available in these upper secondary schools. In the school year 197617 a new curriculum for Gym7zasie7Tcame into operation, but it is too early to say how it is working. In this, there is a common core of studies for all pupils (including at least three periods a week devoted to German, mathematics, and foreign languages) which amounts to about two-thirds of the curriculum. The remainder is available for special subjects which may involve more advanced study of core subjects or may be new subjects. The Abitur will be awarded on the basis of the work of the final two years on the common core and the special subjects, and the results of terminal examinations. A complex grading scheme is being introduced which may well raise serious problems. Dr A. G. Hearnden tells me that this is a sensitive area, because the number of entries to many university courses is limited and high grades in the Ahitur will be needed for admission to some courses. This situation is well known and accepted in Britain, but this is not so in West Germany. It is difficult to assess the standards achieved in, say, mathematics by all successful candidates for the Abitur. From conversations with young people who have taught English in German schools I have formed the impression that the standard is above ‘0’ level but is, of course, less than ‘A’ level. The specialist science for the Abitur is also likely to involve less material than British ‘A’ levels, but the intellectual standard may well be considerably above ‘0’ level. The school pattern in the U.S.A. is broadly compatible with the European patterns already described. the terminal examination is really a school record or profile of the student showing all the courses taken and the individual grades received. For post-school studies there is a wide variety of public and private institutions, ranging from those which are non-selective to those which are highly selective and have special entrance assessment procedures. Some institutions use their their own tests, while others use the facilities of the College Entrance Examination Board and the American College Testing Program. First degree courses also show considerable variations between countries. The majority of courses in England and Wales are at least one year shorter than those on the Continent and in the U.S.A. Again, there is no objective way of comparing standards achieved in main subjects. At one time it was commonly believed that American first degrees were hardly more advanced than British ‘A’ levels. Today, first degrees in science at prestigious American universities are probably of about the same standard as honours degrees in Britain. The Ph.D. degree in science, or its equivalent in some European countries, has come to have an international status. In Britain, many successful candidates are aged 24-26 while in the U.S.A. and Europe they are often aged about 26-30. Hitherto, most British Ph.D. students have studied and researched full-time, while part-time Ph.D. programmes are more common in other countries. The standards achieved in Britain and at the more distinguished graduate schools in the U.S.A. are closely comparable. The Royal Institute of Chemistry has recently reported on a survey in America on the acceptability of the British Ph.D. and, in the main, the conclusions are very favourable. Perhaps the main difference between the two sys131
terns is to be found in the American insistence on a considerable component of assessed course work in their Ph.D. courses. In some sciences, notably physics and mathematics, this practice is followed in Britain, although the courses are not usually examined thoroughly. The Science Research Council has expressed itself to be in favour of encouraging graduate course work in order to broaden the range of a student’s understanding of his own and related subject areas. This particular recommendation is not so strongly supported by many university scientists, who prefer to put more emphasis on research achievements than is often the case in the U.S.A. My personal view is that we achieve a very high Ph.D. standard in science in Britain at a slightly earlier age than elsewhere. To what extent this depends on our specialist science education between 16 and 18 at school and the single-honours degree is a matter for debate.
Possible
developments
in science
education
in Britain
For some years now I have been urging that school education should be planned to delay significant choices for further study later than is the case at present. Ideally, I would like to see all secondary pupils following comprehensive but adequate science courses up to 16+. I do not believe that these courses can be planned effectively to allow a very wide ability range to be taught simultaneously. The real problem is how much time can be allocated for this programme in the 13-16 age range. Sadly, I do not believe sufficient time can be found for all pupils to do three sciences and for the top ability group to tackle three ‘0’ levels. Some time ago the Schools Council developed an integrated science programme (SCISP) occupying the time of two ‘0’ levels; this was intended to prepare pupils for any of the main ‘A’ level science courses. The programme works well, but has not proved very popular with teachers. Perhaps we need a programme in which three sciences are kept separate, but the overall teaching time is only that corresponding to two ‘0’ levels. Inevitably subject content will be reduced, which raises problems. Also there is pressure from engineers for ‘0’ level science programmes to contain more everyday applications of science than is the case now. If this were done, and the teaching time reduced too, undoubtedly the basic conceptual content of the courses will be reduced appreciably. This dilemma has to be faced if premature specialisation is to be avoided. Personally, I would give the very highest priority to achieving this goal even if it means conceding some content in courses. Since 1964 the Schools Council has been considering revising the sixth form curriculum and the examination at 18 + Several plans for broadening the curriculum have been proposed but subsequently rejected. At present a scheme for a five-subject curriculum is being considered, in which subjects would be available at two levels, the Normal (N) and Further (F) levels. Aspirants to degree courses would be expected to study five subjects, possibly three being at N-level and two at the higher F-level. This scheme is based on proposals made in 1973 by a Schools Council and Universities’ Joint Working Party. [7]. Preparations are now being made for a new report on possible N and F syllabuses and grading arrangements. A new scheme
Endeavour, (Pergamon
132
New Series Volume 1. No. 314. 1977 Press. Printed in Great Britain)
of this kind could not be introduced in England and Wales before the mid-1980s. I support this kind of development, although I would give higher priority to achieving a balanced curriculum for all up to 16+. It is worth noting that, since its introduction in 1970, the lntevnational BaccalaurPat (IB) has gained wide acceptance. This system is a six subject curriculum with each subject available at two levels; normally three subjects are studied at each level. The mother tongue, a second language, mathematics, and a science form a compulsory core of studies. One subject must be chosen from history, geography, economics, philosophy, etc. and the remaining one from languages, further mathematics, sciences, art, music, etc. Personally, I believe the existing English and Welsh systems of ‘A’ levels must soon move closer to Scottish and European practices and the proposed five-subject N and F levels does just this. If the N and F pattern for upper secondary education is introduced in Britain, degree courses will have to be revised. Many university scientists and engineers deplore this and feel that degree standards will be unduly eroded. I do not myself think that an N and F scheme would itself render four-year undergraduate programmes essential, but there is already evidence that existing first degree science courses are overloaded. Consequently, I can see a good case being made for four-year courses from, say, 1985 onwards. The size of the 18 + age group in Britain will be falling then, and so universities may be able to cope fairly readily with longer degree courses. Alternatively, we should accept an appreciable lowering of first degree standards but make provision for some students-perhaps about half-to extend first degree courses prior to starting postgraduate courses or entering employment. No doubt science degree courses will be revised in many ways dui-ing the next ten years. Much needs to be done in the applied science area and in the preparation of science students for employment in industry. Developments of this nature will require more active collaboration of industry with educational institutions than is usually the case at present. In conclusion, it can be maintained that science education in schools and in higher education institutions is maintaining high standards in Britain in times of serious financial stringency. Many changes will be needed in the future but I believe the system has the resilience to respond. References
[l] [Z] [3] [4] [S] [6] [7]
Barnard, G. A. and McCreath, M. D. J. R. J/. R. statist. Sot. 133, Series A, pt 3, 358, 1970. Mathematics, Science and Modern Languages in Maintained Schools in England-an Appraisal of Problems in some Key Subjects’. H.M. Inspectorate, London. 1977. ‘Postgraduate Training’. SRC Working Party Report, London. 1975. Hearnden, A. G. ‘Preparation, Assessment and Selection for University’. Schools Council, London. 1970. Idem. ‘Education, Culture and Politics in West Germany’. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 1976. Halls, W. D. ‘Education, Culture and Politics in Modem France’. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 1976. ‘Preparation for Degree Courses’. Working Paper 47. Schools Council, London. 1973.