Under the Microscope / Prof William Reville:There is international concern over the decline in uptake of school science subjects by young people. This concern has prompted the commissioning of many studies and reports, eg, the Report of the Task Force on the Physical Scienceshere in Ireland in 2002.
Another international study entitled the Relevance of Science Education (Rose) project is currently under way, directed by Prof Svein Sjoberg, University of Oslo. Its purpose is to look at students' opinions of school science and science in general. Thirty-seven countries have participated in the study to date, including Ireland.
The results of the Irish Rose project, presented by Dr Philip Matthews, School of Education, TCD, who directed the study, has just been published by The Royal Irish Academy. The book is complemented by a website www.ria.ie/publications/rose.
The instrument used by the Rose project to gather information is a questionnaire consisting of 217 short questions to be answered by choosing options on a four point scale - "disagree", "low disagree", "low agree", "agree". The Irish study was completed in November 2003, when the questionnaire was answered by 688 Transition or fifth year students (330 girls and 358 boys), mean age 15.5 years. The questions covered six main themes - What I Want to Learn About, Me and Environmental Challenges, My Future Job, My Opinion About Science and Technology, My Out of School Experiences, and Myself as a Scientist.
All of the students had experienced the Junior Certificate science curriculum. On average they enjoyed the subject, but their interest is uneven. The highest degree of interest is in themes involving health, sex, genetics, origins of life, the universe, and natural disasters. Some of the lowest interest ratings are for topics that form major parts of the Junior Science syllabus, eg "atoms/molecules", "how plants grow" and "electricity". The students also express low interest in technical aspects such as how nuclear power, rockets, satellites and petrol engines work.
The students agree moderately that school science is interesting and will be helpful in everyday life. Some responses correlate with gender, eg girls are more interested than boys in babies, cosmetics and eating disorders; boys are more interested than girls in nuclear weapons and explosives. Both boys and girls are interested in how communications/entertainment technology, such as DVDs, CDs and mobile phones work. Half the students found Junior Certificate science to be demanding and difficult.
Students are generally optimistic about science and technology, believing it will continue to cure disease and find solutions for environmental problems. They do not believe we should always believe what scientists tell us however and they don't accept that scientists are "neutral and objective". Neither do they believe that science does much to help the poor or to eradicate poverty and famine.
The great majority of students stoutly assert that they don't want to become scientists or technologists. Those who express an interest in a science career are mainly orientated towards biological/medical/health areas. In general the students hope for jobs that would allow them to exercise good personal and social relations. They also look forward to careers that will be very financially rewarding.
The Task Force on the Physical Sciences (2002) strongly recommended the introduction of a robust practical element into the second level science curriculum. This is sound educational policy - science is a practical subject and can only be taught properly when good laboratory facilities are available. However, it was also hoped that the bolstering of the practical elements would make the subject more interesting, leading to a higher proportion of students going on to choose science at third level. Dr Matthews makes the interesting point that such has not been the experience elsewhere following major enhancement of practical science at second level.
He differentiates between "interest" and "motivation". Practical science can increase temporary interest but not necessarily motivation to become a scientist. Science is essentially cerebral. Practical experiments are essential and spark interest, but this interest can be snuffed out by the necessary follow on exercise of interpreting results in the light of theory, thereby weakening motivation to do science in the long term.
This Rose survey is interesting and valuable. Students are more interested in science subjects they can relate to as whole human beings in their everyday lives (mainly subjects relating to health and the environment) than in the basic physical disciplines of physics, chemistry and mathematics. The latter subjects are much more abstract and are of significant spontaneous interest only to a minority of students who have a natural aptitude for them.
Probably the biggest current problem in attracting young people into science and engineering careers is that we are not attracting a sufficient proportion of the brightest students. We must implement policies to ensure that a high proportion of the brightest students who are naturally attracted to science, and to the physical sciences in particular, go on to take up careers in these areas. Such students will not automatically take science or engineering at university because they often also find other areas very attractive, eg medicine, law or business studies, areas that promise not only interesting, but also lucrative, careers.
Science must successfully compete with these other areas by demonstrating the availability of attractive well-paid careers to graduates. This has not been done successfully to date.
Promotion of science concentrates too much on dilute "scatter gun" efforts aimed at making science seem "interesting" and "fun". This policy will never pay off properly unless we also convince young people that science and engineering offer pathways to very well-paid and attractive careers.
William Reville is Associate Professor of Biochemistry and Public Awareness of Science Officer at UCC - understandingscience.ucc.ie