I have read with some amazement the sackcloth and ashes emails that
followed the report of the House of Lords.  Surely it offers new
opportunities to influence the way the public responds to science without ,
as I see it, shutting any doors?  As an expatriate Pom, I return to the UK
on a regular basis, and on the last two occasions I have been privileged to
talk to small audiences at meetings organised by CETPASE in north east
England.

First, let me say that British efforts in the field of the public
understanding of science are outstanding.  In the thirty years  since the
1971 Standing Conference on Schools Science and Technology, the SATRO,
SETNET, SETPOINT network has covered the whole of UK and brings an enviable
amount of support to children in  schools.  More recently, astronomical
millennial funding (I'm green with envy) has been poured into various
centres designed to increase the public understanding of science.  But in
spite of all this, UK still shares with the rest of the world a systemic
problem; school enrolments in science and the public repute of science are
both falling.  Doesn't this suggest that something else is needed?

In Australia, the situation may be worse because we haven't enjoyed the
huge outpouring of energy that has been typical of the UK scene.
Australian efforts are  largely characterised by the uncoordinated
activities of enthusiasts.  Government spending is minimal (there is a Govt
Science and Technology Program, which in my opinion has wasted half its
funds on the Australia Prize and the other half on a myriad small but well
meaning projects that aren't funded for follow up).  And the outcome?
There are twice as many children finishing year 12 than there were a decade
ago.  In the same period, the total number of enrolments in science
subjects in year 12 has diminished by 13,000.  A large proportion of the
increase in year 12 enrolment is due to increased enrolments by girls.  It
is clear that science has not maintained its market share of the boys and
is not making great inroads into the girls.

 A large part of the problem is the 'culture' of university science
departments and physics in particular - the approach to teaching, the
'clubbiness' and the intensely competitive attitudes to learning and
research.  The outcome is one of catastrophically falling enrolments with
the result that some physics departments have closed, others are threatened
with closure.

This has knock-on implications for science at the university, for the
universities have to respond.  There are more universities in Australia
than ever before - over thirty - and they are all competing for students.
If they don't get students, they don't get funded.  If they don't get
science students they can't afford a science faculty.  Already Adelaide
University Council has a recommendation before it, to disperse its science
faculty departments among other, more apparently relevant faculties, such
as engineering and agriculture.   It is likely to be thrown out, but it is
a thought that would have been unthinkable as little as two decades ago.
It certainly suggests that both the popularity and the relevance of science
in Australia are in disrepute.

This brings me to the point of our Centre.  It is "a university centre
whose brief is to empower Australians by encouraging in them the confidence
of 'ownership' of modern science. It is intended to increase science
awareness in the Australian community and to improve communication skills
of scientists."  In other words, we are trying to bring about a positive
affective change towards science in our communities.  But we see this as an
adjunct to the effort that is being put into public understanding.  If we
have two legs, we may be able to walk further.



Chris Bryant
Emeritus Professor

National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science
Faculty of Science
Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200
tel (02) 6249 4815; fax (02) 6279 8991




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%