Courses for arts 'failures' attacked: Conversion schemes 'will not give UK scientists it needs'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.CRASH courses to turn failed arts students into scientists are not likely to provide the country with the scientific manpower it needs, Professor Sir David Weatherall, president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, said yesterday.
Sir David was commenting on reports that universities were offering conversion courses for A-level students who had failed to make the grade for their chosen arts degrees, and on science's lack of popularity as a career.
'In the USA, there's a very strong feeling now that it's no bad thing to have people with an arts background coming into science, and certainly into medical school,' Sir David said. 'At Harvard medical school they are actually encouraging this kind of background.
'But that's a very different thing from taking people who failed to get into arts, giving (them) a crash course and seeing if you can turn them into scientists.'
Sir David, Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford University, was speaking in advance of the association's annual science festival, which takes place at Keele University next week.
He said there was an anti-science atmosphere in Britain, with people's concerns centred on the environment and preventive medicine. In schools, 'well-organised' animal rights activists had been successful in getting their messages across, dissuading pupils from pursuing a science career.
'In the medical sciences, it's fascinating to see the change that's happened in the last 10 years. If you take an advertisement for a straight hospital post, you'll probably get about 20 to 30 times more applicants than for an academic medical research post,' he said.
Changes in the curriculum had blunted many teachers' enthusiasm. In addition, a teacher who had specialised in biology could now be asked to teach physics too and would find it difficult to enthuse.
Sir David said that education beyond the age of 16 should be broader for both scientists and artists.
'There is no doubt that, if you start to specialise (in science) at the age of 14, you never take any kind of arts subject seriously after that. It is a problem that does a lot of damage.'
He said the 'whole ethos' had changed. It was not just that science received a bad press, rather that people just felt uneasy about it. People felt the promise of breakthroughs had not been met. In the field of genetics, for example, people expected rapid progress and had been disappointed. But the problem was one of perspective - diseases were very complex; a gene for Alzheimer's disease was only one step forward.
Leading article, page 35
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments