1/2 of all state schools have no girls sitting physics A level

I just wish primary science was made to be more interesting

isnt that up to individual teachers though kim, in the way it is delivered?

DD1 is in Y11 at a co-ed non-selective state school. She already has A*s in the chemistry and physics modules completed so far. She is very keen to take physics at A level, and will be going to a co-ed non-selective sixth form college. She will do maths A levels as well, not sure what the fourth will be. However, she wants to be a lawyer!

They should be learning how to do it properly perhaps. Taught by somebody with a good understanding themselves. This is not always the case. I remember being told by my son's teacher in year 2 that he could design a fair test. But when I looked at his book, well, it wasn't her comments that ensured that was the case...

I didn't learn experiment design at primary school. I learned to observe closely though, and record what I saw. I think that is the first skill, and then we can move onto planning and fair tests in secondary schools. It does underpin Science of course, but all children learn Science right up until they are 16. We can pace it.

Here's a thought: So many girls are subtly imprinted from birth with notions that "their" territory is pretty, colourful, rounded things- just look at what is marketed as a "girl" toy vs those marketed as "boy" toys even from toddlerhood. "Girl" toys are so much more cosy and domestic and symmetrical, "boy" toys tend to be more industrial and chaotic (think of those Lego transformables) and furthermore challenge building and engineering skills. Even by age 5 most children have a strong notion of what supposed to be interesting to them. Physics appears more industrial and chaotic than other subjects.

By age 14 when serious life choices are being made, it is too late. It is also specious to blame primary schools where the curriculum is the same for everyone, boy or girl.

This gendering crap of the things that very young children play with has a large impact imo.

As a female physics graduate and former physics teacher, I think that part of the problem is that in many schools physics is taught by a non-specialist, even at A-level. A lot of the enthusiasm for any subject is generated when a teacher has an in-depth knowledge of the subject, and can direct and encourage learning which extends the syllabus.

I personally believe the teaching environment can influence whether students choose a subject , and that schools should prioritise well - equipped labs with full sets of working equipment. I wonder whether there could be a gender difference in terms of the degree to which students are put off by inadequate labs ?

I am stunned that some posters think that primary school children should not be learning how to carry out investigations - that's what underpins the whole of science !

A bit of a tangent, but for those of you who say you were put off Physics for one reason or another but are still interested, can I point you in the direction of www.coursera.org/courses :) There aren't many physics courses up there yet, but there are a couple of astronomy ones, and lots of maths, computing etc.

Really Harbinger ? Where I live doing a combination of science and humanities or arts isn't a problem. Where one school can't do it, they work in cohorts and allow 6th formers to pick up a subject at another school, but the mixing of science and English say, is pretty common.

I don't think it's any more family friendly than secondary, although thinking about it, you are more likely to get sensible part time hours.

Trouble is, most primary teachers seem to do BEd rather than BSc PGCE. And while there's a lot to be said for generalists in primary, at the risk of sounding like Gove, a C grade Science GCSE is no real indicator of genuine scientific understanding...

geegee - it will depend to some extent on age (there used to be more learn on the job/HNC type routes - in science even if you go further back) and on what type of engineer. Electrical engineer yes -electronic or chemical engineer, less likely I'd have thought.

geegee I work with a number of engineers who don't have degrees-they started on site. One in particularly, started as an apprentice spark and worked up to design consultant. You wont find a better electrical engineer. I dont think the academic is the only valid route

I would like to see more Science-trained primary teachers though. That would be fabulous!

There was someone on the radio recently - I've forgotten the details but I think he was a scientist who was very into enthusing children - who was suprised when one of his students said she was going into teaching primary...but then he realised how great it was.

DDs primary had a teacher who specialised in science. And one who was a mathematician. Both women so there was no 'girls find maths/science hard' claptrap there! (we've been very lucky)

It strikes me that this idea could attract more girls into continuing science - traditional academic/industry science/eng careers are notoriously family-unfriendly (mine is a wonderful exception, maybe some of you too) - but primary teaching has to be one of the most family-friendly around.

Harbinger That's the problem, physics is not a requirement for medicine or dentistry. If it was needed,some of them might have become engineers

Actually in Scotland, where its common to do 6-8 Highers for medicine or dentistry, physics is standard. As for engineering, I live in a city which employs a lot of engineers, and have met several very highly paid ones who don't have degrees - whats going on there?!

All students in England and Wales do all three sciences to 16 now. There are a variety of different courses, but they all comprise Biology, Chemistry and Physics.

We have girls. Both our physics teachers are women though. In fact, 3/4 of the Science department are women, including all the TLR holders.

I find primary physics sometimes embeds those misconceptions though really, in answer in Bonsoir's post right at the beginning of the thread. I have to quickly shut my DC's Science book on Parents' evenings. I would like to see more Science-trained primary teachers though. That would be fabulous!

That's the problem, physics is not a requirement for medicine or dentistry. If it was needed,some of them might have become engineers!

I doubt it... engineers do not have the right status in this country. Its one of the big problems with this economy. If you're a kid capable of doing science A levels, you may well prefer medicine - extremely well paid by the taxpayer, and if you're a woman, it can be relatively family-friendly - rather than a less well paid, far less secure, undervalued career as an engineer - but engineers, and scientists, are the people more than any who earn money for the country by making stuff we can sell. Its totally arse about face. Germany values engineers... look at their export industries. Sorry, I digress.

Actually, thinking back, I wanted to do Physics at O grade (Scottish equivent of O level) and wasn't allowed to by my mum ( a teacher) who said that it didn't fit alongside my other options of French, German and music ( only had four options, plus English and maths). So I ended up doing history ( which I loved) but no science beyond the age of 13. Which is really sad.

Geegee - home economics is equally important, everybody should learn how to run a home and feed themselves well. Everybody

Oh, I've learnt that all right. And how to paint, tile and do rather a lot of DIY. I can also sew. I just didn't see the point of learning it in school time, its not an academic subject, and my immediate future was university, not running a home and baking. So glad I refused to do it, and never, ever regretted it.

excellent coed comp , quite, how many of those around. Most 6th forms locally can't do a timetable mix like that.

I found physics really boring at school. I was really interested in chemistry myself, but my school didn't do A Levels in Chemistry so i couldn't do that. I can't recall if they even did Physics as an A Level without having to change schools (quite a few subjects required a change of sixth form for certain subjects and that wasn't something most of us fancied doing at that age). It was bad enough doing GCSE Double Science, when ideally i'd have liked to have chosen a specific part of Science to study, let alone then considering doing the as an A-Level in a specific area having never got the opportunity to study it in that much detail before...and i was in a top set (apparently that meant i was intelligent...so intelligent i refused to do the higher GCSE paper & opted to do the foundation paper. If it was in chemistry then fine, but the thought of getting a load of physics questions scared me enough into the refusal). School set ups were all wrong then. Not sure how they are now. This was 12 years ago!

kim...I am rather impressed by the emphasis on 'fair tests'. Understanding the scientific method - even for non-scientists - is surely very important.

nailak - all that stuff is on the NC now (not sure if its staying there...). If anyones kids aren't being taught it at the moment there's something wrong.

I don't remember doing much science at primary when I was at school, but that was in the 60s.