Letter: Scientific progress
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.Sir: I graduated with an upper second in chemistry in 1970. This week I have been helping my 14-year-old daughter, in the first year of her GCSE studies in science, with some chemistry problems ("Shephard plans to make exams tougher", 6 December).
She was expected to tackle subjects in organic chemistry that I had not even considered until the lower sixth form. I cannot square this with the notion that children now are not being taught science to the same level as 20 years ago. Indeed, as sixth-formers back in the Sixties, we were doing as part of our revision studies for maths exam papers from the Oxford final MA in mathematics from the 1950s.
Each generation probably studies more and not less than their parents but we just don't like to admit it. This is really most unfair to our children.
Dr PETER GLOVER
Rayleigh, Essex
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments