Graham

<< Yes qanda the enter scores for science at uni are a disgrace. An OP of 17 would get you into Queensland Uni ... Yet we're supposed to genuflect to these individuals on matters of science because three years later they come out with a degree! >>

I also said, Graham:

"not all mind you, there are some very bright students coming through as well, the ones with a real passion and fire in their belly."

You will find that there ARE some really smart people entering science, who go on to post grad and doctoral work.

If you really think we (society) genuflect to individuals with no real ability in science then you are simply, wrong.

Have you seen, or do you know what, the 'science in society' component is?

Perhaps this

http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Curriculum_-_Science.pdf

is a good starting point?

Graham I agree that teachers are involving themselves in areas once considered the responsibility of parents. And this is a shame.

If you read my post I am not proposing we substitute the basics for the other. In fact I was stressing the importance of the basics but for science some brief coverage of the relevance of science would probably only take a lesson or two would be a good introduction to the science curriculum. Not a whole subject in itself.

It is ironic that schools now offer a greater range of subjects once thought only suitable for tertiary studies such as Psychology, Business studies and Legal studies, while the basics have been neglected.

The basics or foundation are important building blocks in education.

GY

I learned the science maxim that "nothing exists in a vacuum". By that I mean, the problem is far deeper that the attitude, that spawned your pejoratively "loaded" language is prepared to accept. I would commend Poirot's contribution as a start.

IMO it hinges on what society wants an education to achieve and what is possible for the commitment of funds.

I should point out that the day of general polymath scientist no longer exist. The sheer bulk of information today means specialisation is the only feasible way to excel.

e.g. an 8 yo today, has learned more science than our grand parents did in their entire lives.

One also might suggest that This uber specialisation is a part cause of lack of interest in it's self. It limits future advancement i.e. a marine biologist that specialises on Antarctic plankton has limited career options.

Given that many speciality fields exist to day that didn't in our day, on what basis are you concluding that the percentage of students as a proportion of the public , undertaking science in general is decreasing? Could it be that they are spreading out amongst the different fields

On what basis are you concluding that the overall quality of the top students as a % of the population in hard science is decreasing? Ever tried to get a job.

I further question your OP 17 i.e. which degree. My son couldn't get into micro Electronics with an 8 at that uni.

I would also point to attitudes in the wider community. Look around at the views expressed on AGW by unqualified wantonly uninformed contrarians in OLO (excluding you and selected others) and some bush based sites. Hardly conducive to the children of these parents to take on hard science.

Add to that, gone are the days when children experimented in the backyard or at the local creek .What we have now are generations conditioned to be passively entertained/ stimulated with all manner of toys and distraction. Part 2 next post.

Lastly, let me quote from experience. In SA I raised money for the local CSIRO “double helix “ science club, to start up on going electronic and chemistry workshops. (25 places 4 courses each topic, each a school holiday. They were always *always* booked out )
The biggest opposition to the chem workshops came from the professional body because....they felt it was trivialising their topic.
Part 2

BTW Adelaide had the biggest membership of all the states with 2500 active members. The committee and I (all volunteers) organised 20 events per quarter after hours or week ends. Science spectaculars etc.
80% were oversubscribed forcing duplicates.

5 years later I tried to set up the same in DH Queensland they were concerned it was more work for them not interested involving parents in the organisation. 10 children and dads turned up. Go figure?

Graham it isn't as simple as bashing a government that you disagree with politically it is *far* more complex and is apolitical.

My dentist was a research scientist, in both public, then private areas. He went back to school at 31, & became a dentist, as he was sick of being poor.

It's a worry, if they are taking even more out. Ten years ago, when I had to coach my daughter, & a couple of her school mates, I was amazed at how much had gone, since I did maths & physics in school, back in the 50s. I was also surprised at how they had managed to make maths a semi literary subject.

I had to do this coaching, as of the 4 teachers assigned to senior maths, in a very large, [1600 kids], school, only one could actually do the maths involved in Maths C. That teacher was abssent for about 25% of school time. Of the various coaching offered in a large district, not one could handle maths C.

Even the maths coaching school run on saturday, at QUT, could not offer maths C, at that time. With my fumbling efforts, help from a couple of kids, who were so brilliant, they could do it for themselves, [don't you just hate them] & a couple of hours a week, from a physics post grad student we found, we got 5 students through to good OPs.

The OP system is another pet hate of mine, but that's another story.

From this I would say that education departments have given up on trying to get teachers who can do the job.

I think it's true to say the new curriculum is probably written with this in mind, to fit the teachers they have.

Lets hope we can import cheep science people from India, & China, there won't be many from here.