Under the Microscope:The latest figures for entry to third-level science, engineering and technology (SET) education in Ireland are most disappointing (An Overview of Applications and Acceptances to Higher Education, Higher Education Authority, November 2006).
The Irish economy is now entirely dependent on science-based technology. Its future health depends on a generous supply of scientists and engineers and, unless current trends of intake to SET are reversed, the country faces big trouble.
The participation rate of secondary-school leavers in higher education has increased consistently over the past three decades: 20 per cent in 1980; 25 per cent in 1986; 36 per cent in 1992; 44 per cent in 1998; and 55 per cent in 2004. The number of students who accepted CAO offers in 1990 was 11,540; in 2006, this figure had risen to 38,955.
Compare acceptances of places at third level by discipline in 2000 with acceptances in 2006, and you'll see a downturn in student demand for computing, engineering and science (see table).
Computing and engineering in particular are experiencing serious difficulties.
On the other hand, arts and humanities and business and law are holding up well, between them accounting for more than 50 per cent of entrants into honours degree programmes. It is also interesting that entry into nursing rivals entry into science honours degree programmes - per head of population, Ireland has the greatest number of nurses of any country in the world.
Efforts to date to attract more students into SET have failed. The Government is now strongly considering awarding bonus CAO points for science Leaving Cert subjects where students opt for third level SET programmes. I cannot see how this would solve the problem. It might temporarily boost numbers entering science by raising some poor-performing second level students over the points cut-off bar, but how well would they fare in third level science? We already have a worrying drop-out rate from SET third level courses. Also, after a short while, extra points for science Leaving Cert subjects would be taken for granted, losing their "bonus" allure.
In my opinion, the main reason SET is not a popular choice is because students and their parents do not perceive that SET offers a secure route to prestigious, high-salaried careers. The public has only a vague notion of the role of a scientist and perceives SET jobs as relatively scarce and modestly paid.
But, you may object, if my hypothesis regarding the reason for poor intake into third level SET is correct, how would I explain the persistent robust demand for arts and humanities, an area where there is no widespread assumption of plentiful pathways to prestigious, well-paid careers? Well, until very recently, Ireland staked its claim to international prominence in higher learning and culture entirely on our achievements in the arts and humanities (writers, poets, music); science didn't figure in the national consciousness. There was always a strong traditional intake into third level arts/humanities courses and these qualifications were seen to offer a flexible range of career choices. No such tradition ever existed in Ireland for SET.
There is no shortage of demand for university places in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, law, pharmacy and so on. This is because the public has a clear understanding of the roles of these professions and sees them as high roads to prestige and wealth. Intake into SET will remain flaccid until it attains a public perception to rival that of medicine or law.
And why should SET not enjoy such status in
the public eye? After all, in our modern world,
SET is more important than medicine or law. Imagine if all scientists, engineers, technologists
and technicians suddenly vanished, what would happen? The Irish economy would collapse - 87
per cent of the value of our exports is high-tech product of multinational corporations. Also,
modern civilisation would collapse: electrical
power generation would wind down to a halt; telecommunications would stop; TV and radio would be silenced, and so on.
Now imagine if all medical practitioners vanished. Patients awaiting urgent surgery and specialised treatments would suffer. Diagnosis of many new diseases would cease. Vaccination programmes would run down, but a skeleton service could survive because vaccines, produced in scientific laboratories, could be administered by scientists. Drugs, produced in scientific laboratories, would be available, although their administration to patients would be very much sub-optimal because of lack of specialised medical diagnosis. Serious problems would undoubtedly arise, but civilisation would not collapse.
The situation is starkly simple. We are utterly dependent on SET. If we don't make SET more attractive in worldly terms we will suffer dire consequences. A new round of benchmarking is in progress. Amazingly, despite all the Government hype about SET, the last round gave SET a slap in the face - a 3 per cent increase to university lecturers who do most of the scientific research in Ireland, almost the smallest increase to any group in that round. A repeat of that performance could kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
William Reville is Associate Professor of Biochemistry and Public Awareness of Science Officer at UCC (http://understandingscience.ucc.ie.)