Letter: Letters : It's the teachers

From G. W. Dorling

Wymondham, Norfolk

With reference to Anthony Cottingham’s reply (Letters, 28 September p 63) to
your Editorial of 24 August, his “obvious cause” is over-simplistic, although
not without a grain of truth.

As a head of science in the 1970s and 1980s, I changed the science curriculum
of a large state boarding school from separate, elective sciences to Integrated
(double) science for all. The result was a large increase in recruitment to all
the science A levels, a large increase in the number of girls doing physics at A
level and a crop of excellent A-level results. Many of the youngsters from this
period went on to excel in further education both in gaining firsts at
universities and as PhDs.

But in achieving this I was blessed with a team of excellent teachers and
some particularly gifted and committed physicists and chemists. And here lies
the problem—there are few gifted physicists or chemists teaching in
comprehensive schools today. Teaching combined and integrated courses can too
easily conceal this fact. A reversion to separate sciences would not on its own
cure the problem—it would only serve to highlight it.

The other problem for physics, and to some extent chemistry at A level, is
the generally poor grasp youngsters now gain of the sort of mathematical skills
relevant to the physical sciences—something to which I am sure many
A-level physics teachers will bear witness. The problem here is not so much one
of teaching quality as one of a curriculum ill-suited to the needs of science
subjects, where mathematics is a tool to be used, not some arcane philosophy.
After years of finding themselves ill-equipped to tackle the quantitative
aspects of physics at A level, youngsters are understandably loath to risk the
attendant difficulties the subject will present.