Dying because our leaders don’t understand how science works

At the government’s daily press briefing about COVID-19 on the 11th April, the government’s spokesperson, Priti Patel, repeated the mantra first put forward by Boris Johnson, and repeated ad nauseam by ministers since: “We are following,” she said, “the expert scientific and medical advice and taking the right steps at the right moment in time.” Patel was careful with her emphasis. The right steps. At the right moment in time. How does she know? The science says. It’s a bit like that game of Simon says… If Science says so, we do it.

Priti Patel, UK Government Press Briefing, 11 April 2020.

What Patel does not understand, or is not acknowledging, is that Science doesn’t speak to us like that. There is no single guiding voice, providing us with ‘the evidence’, making it clear what we should do and when. Doing-the-right-thing-at-the-right-time is little more than a political slogan, a ditty for us to sing as we merrily dig our graves. The message may provide some comfort—we all want to feel that the government is in control—but it is a false comfort at best. It is not a sign of good judgement and wise decision-making. It hides the details that we so desperately need to debate. It reveals a failure of our society to place the right people in the right positions, a failure of our education system above all else. We don’t need a government which can meekly defer to a scientist standing on the side to answer the difficult questions, but one that understands how to incorporate scientific evidence into policy making. This is not a matter of doing what The Science says. We are lacking leaders with a scientific attitude and an understanding of how science works. Why?

Continue reading “Dying because our leaders don’t understand how science works”

How to Ditch Double Science

The insightful work of the ASPIRES team has shown how deeply damaging double science can be. What remains to be done is to figure out how to ditch it. There’s a simple short-term solution for academies and free schools: replace double science with two sciences. Here’s the reasoning why…

Help for double scientists

Continue reading “How to Ditch Double Science”

The Cluttered Curriculum

We can’t do it all: we can’t teach our children everything. British education systems have responded to the demands of every age by adding to school curricula.  It has been much harder to purposefully take things away. Just like the nice jacket that doesn’t quite fit, we’d better save that little bit of trigonometry in case we need it later. The cluttered curriculum is fueling the great post-GCSE exodus from science: to enthuse young people about the beauty and utility of science, we need to decide what to take away.

Too much clutter

Ever-burgeoning curricula sometimes create a temporary fix for their own problems, when they push entire subjects off school timetables by accident. The passing of subjects such as Latin is occasionally lamented, the threat to drama or music is sometimes recognised, but science curricula continues to protuberate. The accumulation of curricular items has created a particular crisis in science: we don’t spend lesson time on what is most important-we can’t try out, think about, play with scientific ideas-because there’s too much stuff to learn in the first place.

Continue reading “The Cluttered Curriculum”

The Dominance of Biology, Chemistry and Physics

What once made sense makes sense no more; instead, introduce children to science by teaching them genetics, geology, astronomy, neuroscience, medicine, material science and even quantum theory.

Once you know your biology, chemistry and physics, so the argument goes, you can then go on to study more specialised sciences later.  It is best to get the basics right by receiving a good grounding in biology, chemistry and physics first.  That stands you in good stead to be a natural scientist of any stripe.

The other sciences just reduce to biology, chemistry and physics, right? Cartoon courtesy of xkcd.com under a Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC 2.5)

Continue reading “The Dominance of Biology, Chemistry and Physics”