One Hundred Years Of Solitude. Netflix.
Film, Media & TV0 min ago
The 'death' of physics
12 Answers
I have read several articles referring to a more than 50% decrease since 1990 in the numbers of students taking physics A-level. Some university departments have even stopped teaching the subject, viewed as 'too difficult' and 'boring' by many students. There are fears that this will impact heavily in the future for the UK's ability to produce technical innovations and quality engineers, whereas China and India, among others, are investing heavily in their science/technology industries and producing increasing numbers of highly educated engineers and sciences.
1) Does it matter if physics departments disappear from UK universities?
2) How can the subject be made more interesting?
1) Does it matter if physics departments disappear from UK universities?
2) How can the subject be made more interesting?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by violetblue. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
(1) Yes, it certainly does matter if physics (and indeed chemistry) disappear from UK universities. These subjects are fundamental to the future well being of a nation which claims to be advanced and which is interested in hosting successful businesses willing to undertake research and development in many fields.
(2) There is no need to make it �more interesting�. For those who already have an interest (and it is only they who should be considering studying it to A-Levl or degree level) it is a fascinating subject. Yes, it is �hard�, but then so are all topics if you want to study them properly to an advanced level.
Now for my customary rant.
The reason for the decline in subjects such as these is that more and more people are attending university without the necessary grounding (to traditional �A�Level standard) that is necessary. In short, they are not equipped for degree level education.
That is why most universities spend most of the first year bringing all their students up to standard. They can no longer depend on someone who has a handful of A Levels having the required skills, knowledge and aptitude needed to undertake a degree course. Yes, I know there are exceptions. But they are just that � exceptional.
Many of these people choose subjects which they think they may be capable of and because the sciences and maths are �hard� they avoid them. It has nothing to do with them being boring. Universities (who must keep bums on seats to retain their funding) adjust their offerings accordingly.
This government has a �target� to get 50% of children into higher education. Many of them don�t need it and many of those that do go are not capable of undertaking a proper degree course. Until and unless this country realises that this strategy is flawed the �dumbing down� of higher education will continue.
The losers will be the young people themselves, the
(2) There is no need to make it �more interesting�. For those who already have an interest (and it is only they who should be considering studying it to A-Levl or degree level) it is a fascinating subject. Yes, it is �hard�, but then so are all topics if you want to study them properly to an advanced level.
Now for my customary rant.
The reason for the decline in subjects such as these is that more and more people are attending university without the necessary grounding (to traditional �A�Level standard) that is necessary. In short, they are not equipped for degree level education.
That is why most universities spend most of the first year bringing all their students up to standard. They can no longer depend on someone who has a handful of A Levels having the required skills, knowledge and aptitude needed to undertake a degree course. Yes, I know there are exceptions. But they are just that � exceptional.
Many of these people choose subjects which they think they may be capable of and because the sciences and maths are �hard� they avoid them. It has nothing to do with them being boring. Universities (who must keep bums on seats to retain their funding) adjust their offerings accordingly.
This government has a �target� to get 50% of children into higher education. Many of them don�t need it and many of those that do go are not capable of undertaking a proper degree course. Until and unless this country realises that this strategy is flawed the �dumbing down� of higher education will continue.
The losers will be the young people themselves, the
Your rant seemed to finish mysteriously in mid-flow, JudjeJ, I don't know what the missing content is.
As someone who did a chemistry degree, with a brother who did one in physics, I didn't have to have my subject sold to me, I was naturally curious.
I share many of your opinions, although find different causes for them, but the point was made in the newspaper article that students are avoiding the said subject because of how they see it. It is a hard subject - and that shouldn't be a reason for avoidance, since how do you know how well you would do in it if you don't have a try? There are also plenty of 'fashionable' things that have a physics basis, the mobile phone, the Internet, IPODs to name just a few, if there must be some 'angle' to get people interested.
As someone who did a chemistry degree, with a brother who did one in physics, I didn't have to have my subject sold to me, I was naturally curious.
I share many of your opinions, although find different causes for them, but the point was made in the newspaper article that students are avoiding the said subject because of how they see it. It is a hard subject - and that shouldn't be a reason for avoidance, since how do you know how well you would do in it if you don't have a try? There are also plenty of 'fashionable' things that have a physics basis, the mobile phone, the Internet, IPODs to name just a few, if there must be some 'angle' to get people interested.
I think one of the reasons is that 'getting a degree' is now seen as an end in itself. The youngsters are just expected to do it - and expected to want to do it - without really having a good reason or any other goal. So, why pick a degree subject which has a reputation for being 'hard'? Go for Philosophy or Media Studies or such-like. You've still got a degree at the end of it.
My own daughter went to uni. and getting a job was the least important consideration; she just didn't make the link between education/training and a job/career. Not that it mattered in the end, as she says she never wants a 'proper job' - she just does part-time, seasonal jobs and has no further ambition.
And to answer your question, vb, in one way it is important, as jj has said above, but in another way, it isn't, as there are very few opportunities in this country now to use these skills. Fewer and fewer as each year passes, as well. We seem to have given up on such things in the UK.
I'm sorry to see it atrophy though, as I enjoyed it immensely. It is a very satisfying, versatile and relevant subject.
My own daughter went to uni. and getting a job was the least important consideration; she just didn't make the link between education/training and a job/career. Not that it mattered in the end, as she says she never wants a 'proper job' - she just does part-time, seasonal jobs and has no further ambition.
And to answer your question, vb, in one way it is important, as jj has said above, but in another way, it isn't, as there are very few opportunities in this country now to use these skills. Fewer and fewer as each year passes, as well. We seem to have given up on such things in the UK.
I'm sorry to see it atrophy though, as I enjoyed it immensely. It is a very satisfying, versatile and relevant subject.
I'm with JudgeJ i'd say. Of course it matters if physics disappears. While it may not directly lead into a certain career path like engineering or the other sciences, it's versatility lends it's applications to many different situations. Some of the different areas that are asking for physics graduates (among others) that i've seen while searching for jobs include:-
Air Traffic services
Defence companies
Nuclear research
Patenting
Transport related research
Oil & gas companies
Not to mention the obvious route, working for universities in some sort of research capacity
Shortage of physics students will put the UK at a disadvantage in the sci-tech market.
As for pt.2. The subject is fascinating once degree level is reached. Even A-level is interesting, if hard. It's GCSE where the students are lost. Perhaps an introduction of some things like in violetblue's post, would see a greater interest from prospective students. Encourage a few more to stay on and study at A-level.
Air Traffic services
Defence companies
Nuclear research
Patenting
Transport related research
Oil & gas companies
Not to mention the obvious route, working for universities in some sort of research capacity
Shortage of physics students will put the UK at a disadvantage in the sci-tech market.
As for pt.2. The subject is fascinating once degree level is reached. Even A-level is interesting, if hard. It's GCSE where the students are lost. Perhaps an introduction of some things like in violetblue's post, would see a greater interest from prospective students. Encourage a few more to stay on and study at A-level.
I don't know how or what they study as 'physics' now, but when I did it, it was all about real, relevent things. So it seemed to me, anyway.
Light, lenses, reflections, mechanics, electricity, electronics, springs, radioactivity. It was all real hands-on stuff.
Mind, I suppose it helped immensely I had a wildly enthusiastic, and good, teacher. His little 'diversions' were legendary and he often wandered off topic to explain the practical relevence of what he was teaching us.
Light, lenses, reflections, mechanics, electricity, electronics, springs, radioactivity. It was all real hands-on stuff.
Mind, I suppose it helped immensely I had a wildly enthusiastic, and good, teacher. His little 'diversions' were legendary and he often wandered off topic to explain the practical relevence of what he was teaching us.
Catso
I had a A level physics teacher whose "diversions" were certainly not little, and were all the more legendary for it. We managed to learn all manner of things, including the entire history of Napoleon's aluminium dinner service, though none of it was ever likely to appear on an exam paper. The physics part of the lesson tended to be crammed into the last 5 minutes, and was all the more bearable because of that!
I had a A level physics teacher whose "diversions" were certainly not little, and were all the more legendary for it. We managed to learn all manner of things, including the entire history of Napoleon's aluminium dinner service, though none of it was ever likely to appear on an exam paper. The physics part of the lesson tended to be crammed into the last 5 minutes, and was all the more bearable because of that!
First, I am in agreement with most of what has been submitted so far and that this is an important subject.
With that said, here is my rant:
Perhaps what they are teaching as "philosophy" in philosophy should come under greater scrutiny. Hasn�t philosophy, (the love of wisdom), been reduced to dismantling knowledge as an unknowable, unobtainable, and inaccessible realm of human endeavor in recent years?
Philosophy is the foundation on which knowledge, (and therefore human progress), rests and is where knowledge, what it is, and the means by which we obtain it and verify it, is defined.
We live (or die) in an objective reality. Reason can not be totally relegated to the physical sciences if we as humans (an expendable quality of the objective reality in which we live) are to survive and flourish in it.
Science and its product, technology, are the framework and the pinnacle of human understanding but until it is understood that science is only a by-product of philosophy which is the foundation of and for human understanding, the astounding benefits they contribute to humanity are in extreme jeopardy.
With that said, here is my rant:
Perhaps what they are teaching as "philosophy" in philosophy should come under greater scrutiny. Hasn�t philosophy, (the love of wisdom), been reduced to dismantling knowledge as an unknowable, unobtainable, and inaccessible realm of human endeavor in recent years?
Philosophy is the foundation on which knowledge, (and therefore human progress), rests and is where knowledge, what it is, and the means by which we obtain it and verify it, is defined.
We live (or die) in an objective reality. Reason can not be totally relegated to the physical sciences if we as humans (an expendable quality of the objective reality in which we live) are to survive and flourish in it.
Science and its product, technology, are the framework and the pinnacle of human understanding but until it is understood that science is only a by-product of philosophy which is the foundation of and for human understanding, the astounding benefits they contribute to humanity are in extreme jeopardy.
I actually did the classic science A levels (maths, physics and chemistry) yet when I went to university, I eschewed the sciences and studied philosophy. I think there were several reasons for that, mainly that my teachers at school, with the exception of the chemistry teacher, had done their best to make the subjects as dull as possible - I still recall the horror of quadruple lessons of theoretical physics.
My chemistry teacher, on the other hand, introduced concepts such as scientific scepticism, epistemology and the nature of matter, all of which intrigued me. My school had been very proscriptive about one could study and arts and science didn't mix. I found philosophy to contain enough maths to whet my scientific appetite, while considering bigger questions.
BTW, I certainly didn't find philosophy an 'easy' option, predicate calculus is just as hard as its differential namesake.
My chemistry teacher, on the other hand, introduced concepts such as scientific scepticism, epistemology and the nature of matter, all of which intrigued me. My school had been very proscriptive about one could study and arts and science didn't mix. I found philosophy to contain enough maths to whet my scientific appetite, while considering bigger questions.
BTW, I certainly didn't find philosophy an 'easy' option, predicate calculus is just as hard as its differential namesake.
-- answer removed --
1 to 12 of 12
