Slashdot Mirror
Science and Math Enrollments Reach New High In UK
ianare writes "There has been a continued increase in the number of students taking A-level science and maths subjects. Physics has been especially popular. A growing fascination with science and teacher support schemes seem to be improving the teaching of maths and physics in UK state schools. From the article: 'There is evidence that two teacher support schemes funded by the Department for Education and run by the Institute of Physics and Mathematics in Education and Industry are beginning to make a big difference.
The IOP runs a network in England designed to help science teachers teach physics, called the Stimulating Physics Network. The MEI has a similar scheme called the Further Mathematics Support Programme. There is compelling evidence that much of the rise in the numbers of A-level students comes from schools participating in the scheme.'"
So the Government invests in education and this yields results.
Shocking!
I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
I regret not doing more mathematics the first time round at A level, but there are problems to be addressed. I did turn my degree ("major", as Americans seem to call it) toward mathematics, and for preparatory work ended up doing another math A-level via private study, for which I received the top % in the country for that exam board. But all I really did was cram the study books published by the same company which produced the exams.
At a ceremony thing, following a long discussion with some of the staff at the board, I was immediately offered a trial position. I stupidly didn't take it. Well, I know at the time I was recovering from an illness which had just appeared and wasn't really thinking straight about what I could do long term. But I would like to have played at least some part in turning it more from a "learn for the test" thing into a "learn problem-solving" thing.
I think there's probably quite a simple explanation for this. The amount of debt that students in England and Wales will likely need to take on (barring rich parents) to pay for a degree has risen significantly from this year (not quite at US levels yet, but getting much closer). At the same time, the huge expansion in the numbers going to university has meant that the chances of a degree leading to graduate-level employment have fallen sharply.
The perception now is that if you want to go from university into a "good" job, then you need either a science degree, or an arts degree from one of the elite institutions (Oxford, Cambridge, or one of the other top 10 or so universities). A decade ago, studying a "silly" degree for three years could be justified, from the point of view of an 18 year old, on the basis that it meant you got three years of the student lifestyle. If you didn't get a graduate-level job at the end of it, then at least it hadn't cost you all that much. This has changed now (and in a funny way, this is probably a good thing).
Whether the conventional wisdom will actually prove correct for students starting undergraduate degrees in September this year, I don't know. I suspect a maths degree will always make you more employable than a media studies one, but there's no reason to suspect that any portion of the graduate jobs market is immune to over-saturation.
As tends to get pointed out quite frequently, what we lack in the UK (and have lacked for decades now) is a network of decent technical colleges to prepare people for skilled non-academic jobs.
I do hope they can keep improving. Demand for skilled workers, especially in the USA, is still outstripping supply and this is a good first step in helping to rectify the situation.
(Yeah, I know that this report is from the UK and I wrote "especially in USA" but US companies can, will and already do import talent from outside of the USA.)
No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
Will there be any jobs waiting for them when they come out of the system?
You provide a possible explanation - I am sure there's some truth in the belief that students are more discerning now it costs much more to study. However the IOP and others have provided some evidence for their argument so we should at least consider it. Definitely it would be interesting to hear if you've come across research into students' attitudes towards their choice of university courses.
Yes, most likely. There's a huge demand for physics and maths based degrees in the UK. There's a reasonable chance of getting a job in teaching or research, but the real boom area is financial services. Basically, if you can model money with PDEs you'll find a job (although I've known several people drop out of that field because of ethical issues). Physics is probably one of the most adaptable degree subjects, and certainly more employable than being one of the huge number of English Lit / Politics / Philosophy / Economics graduates.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
There are many reasons which may have conflated to produce this result. I moved out of research 20 years ago and have been teaching physics in UK schools ever since, so I have seen various trends during that time.
Physics has always been perceived as hard (especially by girls) and considered geeky. Most of my students have either been out-and-out geeks or those aspiring to medicine/dentistry. A few have shifted into numerate careers (e.g. actuary, accountancy) and several into teaching.
Mostly pupils are interested in the sexier aspects - astrophysics or relativity or quantum theory, rather than mechanics or thermodynamics. Of course, at school level the really hard stuff doesn't kick in but it is still quite challenging for the vast majority of students.
A few years ago maths at A-level in the UK was made significantly easier (this is well-documented elsewhere) and took a lot of students who were considering doing physics as a "hard" option in order to go to medical school. To some extent this is still the case, but more people are doing physics as well. Why?
The courses feeding into A-level have been made easier - this gives people the [misleading] impression that they can cope with physics - and increases the course drop-out rate! Also, it is very valuable for entry on to competitive courses in good universities, but only if you get the top grades. Finally - and perhaps most importantly - it is seen as interesting, thanks to the influence of ambassadors such as Brian Cox (who has over 0.75 million followers on Twitter) and the well-reported recent events at CERN.
It will be fascinating to see how this develops - will the courses be "dumbed-down" (probably not, in the current political and economic climate). Will people realise that physicists are not necessarily directly employable? (I currently know two Ph.D.s who are still working as painters and decorators, several years on). Will the love affair with media science die away? (Again - it was last seen during the Moon landings and yours truly got sucked in as a boy...)
100% agreed. Regardless of actual role (outside EXTREMELY specialised fields and even then experience wins over degree), when hiring, a Maths/Science degree almost guarantees an interview (outside financial services where jobs are currently few and far between, though historically it was almost a pre-requesite).
The unemployment problem isn't to do with lack of jobs, there are plenty available, just not that many for "fluffy" degree grads.
I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
Science and math is really important in our everyday lives. No wonder people should study this subject and focus for the more development and productive country.
I think this trend has more to do with Brian Cox than any government initiative.
What is surprising to me though is that Computing classes are not in the list of "hard" subjects being taken up in increasing numbers. This year, computing is falling.
Maybe no-one wants a computing career, long hours, bad colleagues, constant re-learning crap that's itself obsoleted a couple of years later.
Lets hope the raspberry pi does something, or in a decade everything will be outsourced.
It is probably worth pointing out A-levels are courses offered to 16 -19 year olds (in general and in a school) after the first round of qualifications at 16vand are a pre-requisite to studying at Degree Level, The performance at A-level is what will determine which courses and University these students will be offered. Note there are alternatives to A-levels which tend to be offered at colleges rather than schools.
I get the impression that people think these students are already studying Maths and Science Degree's, but they are not and could choose to enter any number of Degree courses, In many different fields.
Unfortunately A-level subjects tend to be restricted to core subjects such as Math's Physics Chemistry and Biology for potential Bsc students potential BA students tend towards studying the Humanities. The trouble with A-levels is that many schools will not have enough students to be able to support more diverse A-Levels Which is why the alternative is going to a college which draws on a larger area for it's students.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Actually, modded down because you're a dick.
Also because so many students do physics A-level universities often assume that most students will have it.
I remember some of my first year courses in electronic systems engineering being tough because I hadn't done physics at A-level and while they did just about cover everything needed they went through it very quickly.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Initiatives are nice, but I suspect the students are drawn to physics in particular because they see billions on dollars/pounds being spend on the LHC and either thinks it's cool and want to understand whats really going on there, or they see the money. Others will not the rise in interest at the time of their "initiative" and say they caused it. Seems like a survey of the students could help clarify this.
In my case, because I wanted to know more about physics. Ideally I'd have gone on to work on one of the big telescopes in Hawaii, or possibly the Big Secret Hanger in Area 51, but I know when I was going into it that I may work in a field outside physics. Even these days, 15 years later, I still "do physics" on a regular basis, from fixing things to envelope calculations. The reason I went for physics in the first place were, in this order:
1: The pleasure of finding things out.
2: Something I knew would be useful whatever I did.
3: Getting a job.
4: Getting a job in physics.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
It's slightly different in Scotland - you generally do five Highers, which gives you a nice wide range (in my case, Maths, English, Physics, Chemistry and History), this is your basic tertiary entrance exam. You then have a final year when you can either catch up on subjects you didn't do well in, or specialise in a smaller number of subjects at what is roughly 1st year Uni level.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
My graduate degree was in a more applied field. We accepted undergraduate from core majors. Its pobably less likely to major in secondary field, then try to get into math or physics grad school.
Yeah, because saying "I am taking some Maths Subjects" sounds like you are very educated opposed to those dumb colonists.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
It's all the Indian immigrants.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
If I could tell you the answer to that you wouldn't need to worry, you could wait 5 years and I'll give you a couple of million in loose change!
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
As a physics teacher in a standard comprehensive school in the UK, I've seen a massive rise in students choosing physics in maths recently. A few years ago very few were choosing it as it was so much harder that 'travel and tourism' or sociology and got effectively the same qualification. The schools also promoted easier courses as it massively bumped up their pass figures. Whereas now, with the changing job climate, lots of them are realising that not all A-levels were created equally and their job prospects rise dramatically doing sciences and maths (they still aren't great but they are much, much, much better).
You socialist! We need to embrace free-market principles and drastically increase the salaries for local government administrators, while cutting teacher salaries.
Actually my easy comment gave " History's Coming To (1059484)" and "wisdom_brewing (557753)" a forum to add some interesting stuff. I particularly liked History's Coming To's post about Scottish education being different with their " five Highers". Scottish education had been better than the English system for a few hundred years and they produced some of the worlds best in many fields.
Lots of people read my precious comment and many gave up study on the spot.