Do we need scientists?

Tomorrow is A-level results day. For those not in the UK, that means that thousands of 18 year olds will find out if their exams were good enough to let them go to the university of their choice to do the course of their choice. As I’ve said before, the traditional howls of “exams are getting easier” are appearing everywhere. But this year there is more: apparently the main problem is that there aren’t enough scientists. As usual, the Tories have a plan…

Some of the numbers seem fairly clear. Chemistry is, in many places, in real trouble. Anecdotal evidence seems to show that many physics departments are in trouble as well, with recruitment down. The blame seems to be filtering down to the school teachers as per usual, but it wasn’t too long ago that the CBI was blaming universities as well. Should we worry?

Well, only last year HEFCE was claiming that there was no crisis. And, if the point in introducing market-style measures in higher education was to produce what the market “wants”, then I don’t see why the CBI are so surprised. Most high salary jobs seem to follow from careers in law, accountancy or management. Detailed knowledge of the workings of a laser, for example, aren’t perhaps the best preparation.

But at least the CBI want to increase the numbers of people interested in science – something I would desperately like. The Tories’ plan to increase the “worth” of science A-levels seems to misunderstand supply and demand quite breathtakingly – a worrying thing for the economy if this holds true across the whole party.

If science A-levels are worth more, the only incentive for taking them is for students that want to continue to arts degrees. This is because the competition for places on a science degree course will be with other students who have taken the “inflated” science A-levels. For students that want to get on a science course, the only option will be to take all science exams. Universities will adjust their grades to match the standard of student that they can attract. It will make it harder for students doing some non-science A-levels to get onto science degrees. And so the number studying science degrees is likely to drop.

As an example. Andrew wants to study Law; he takes A-levels in English Language, English Literature, History and French. Beth wants to study Physics; she takes A-levels in Mathematics, Further Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. Chris isn’t sure what he wants to do so takes A-levels in Mathematics, Physics, English and German. They all apply to a Russell Group university, strong in both subjects. The offers are the equivalent of AABB for both. However, in terms of UCAS points the offer is 440 points for Andrew but 660 points for Beth. Andrew can’t even get onto the Physics course, even with straight A’s; Chris can’t either, as his maximum points tariff is 600.

There is another possible outcome. That is, all the worst students will study the science A-levels as they know that their grades will be “worth more” to allow them to progress to a degree of some sort. I have heard that the target of getting 50% of 18 year olds into university promoted mediocrity, but this plan seems to be the most direct way of doing it yet.

As a final thought I’ll just note that some people think we should be celebrating the results of the students, not complaining about them. I could not agree more.

Advertisement