Dumbing down science syllabus

[Ramrod]

PUPILS at GCSE are to be allowed to abandon learning traditional †œhardâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚ � science, including the meaning of the periodic table, in favour of †œsoftâà ƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚ � science such as the benefits of genetic engineering and healthy eating.

The statutory requirement for pupils to learn a science subject will be watered down under a new curriculum introduced next year. There will be no compulsion to master the periodic table †� the basis of chemistry †� nor basic scientific laws that have informed the work of all the great scientists such as Newton and Einstein.

This country really is going down the tubes

link

[marky]

So the exams will be easier, the kids will get higher grades and in so making them look smarter,

Bad idea

[punky]

I think kids should be taught both "hard" and "soft" sciences... Not one over the other.

[Ramrod]

It looks like the real education will take place in private schools, widening the gap between state and private pupils even further....

[nffc]

Scandal.

[Angua]

Tis nothing new.

When I was at school (pre GCSE days) you had to do at least one science subject of which there were 4 choices, Chemistry, Biology, Physics and "Project Science". I did the latter which involved several areas of interest including Photography, Astronomy, Communications, Practical electrics, Metalurgy and a one other which I can't remember now.

Photography included making our own cameras and film right through to darkroom developing and framing a subject. Communications included Egyptian Heroglyphs through to Morse Code and Radio.

I found it a great alternative to "hard" science, for which I had no interest whatsoever.

What I think this latest thing is for, is to try and re-introduce some form of cookery lession back into the curriculum (all be it under the guise of science). Which given the microwave and ready meals is a skill sadly lacking in childrens upbringing these days.

[nffc]

Well, it's a decent idea to introduce "relevant" science but it should be to supplement the three core sciences, and to apply theory NOT instead of.

There's already a shortage of science students as it is.

[jrhnewark]

"Master the periodic table"..?

What's there to master at GCSE? You learn the halogens, the alkali metals and the transititions. If you do triple award, you learn more about ionic and covalent compounds, etc.

Newtons' Laws. How many people actually know what they are? Few, I should think.

Step in the wrong direction, as far as I can see. I emmensly enjoyed the DNA and human genome side of Biology at GCSEs and thought it was very worthwhile, so genetic engineering is fine as far as I can see.

Healthy eating isn't a science, it's something monkeys can do. With all this waste of time with 'Citizenship' and 'PSHE', can't 'healthy eating' be covered in that?

We might have a lot of 14 year olds that know that racism is bad, but nobody's going to teach them who David Blunkett is.

Teaching? "Healthy eating" lessons sound more like spoonfeeding to me.

[cookie_365]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

This country really is going down the tubes

link

Why? I've never come across any circumstance whatsoever where knowing the periodic table would come in useful.

[Chimaera]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Why? I've never come across any circumstance whatsoever where knowing the periodic table would come in useful.

Quiz nights?

I suppose it's useful if you are going to study chemistry at a higher level though.

[marky]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Why? I've never come across any circumstance whatsoever where knowing the periodic table would come in useful.

In that case grab the co2 and put the fire out

[jrhnewark]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Why? I've never come across any circumstance whatsoever where knowing the periodic table would come in useful.

I've never found perpendicular bisectors useful outside of maths class, should I be complaining?

Or do you want to undertake some sort of massive educational rethink?

[cookie_365]

Originally Posted by marky

In that case grab the co2 and put the fire out

Errrr .... ???? What ????
__________________

Originally Posted by jrhnewark

I've never found perpendicular bisectors useful outside of maths class, should I be complaining?

Or do you want to undertake some sort of massive educational rethink?

Never found them that useful inside of maths either

I'm just saying that rather than say 'isn't it terrible they're dropping this traditional subject' we should be thinking about why children study particular subjects in the first place, and if we can make room for useful subjects like nutrition by edging out the, err, less widely required ones, that's got to be a good thing surely ??

Incog gets out her deckchair and the iced tea.


I want a deckchair smiley...

[Bex]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

Why? I've never come across any circumstance whatsoever where knowing the periodic table would come in useful.

i guess it all depends what sort of job you end up doing..

i actually read this this morning in the metro (classy paper i know) I can understand the reasoning for those who really can't cope with "hard" science but I do not think it should replace the option to learn it totally