We agonise a lot about science. How can we persuade more kids to enjoy it more and study it for longer?
Business leaders regularly prophesy doom because British universities are not producing enough engineers. Engineering places at universities go begging because not enough students are coming through from schools.
Are the exams too difficult? It is often claimed that A-levels in maths and science are more difficult than, say, English or media studies - though maths and physics have a higher proportion of top grades because answers tend to be right or wrong, unlike in essay subjects. Today's suggestion that GCSE science papers should be made easier fits this diagnosis.
Does it make sense to make science easier to encourage more children to stick with it - or will this devalue the subject and put off youngsters with an academic spark? And might it backfire? The jump to A-level study is already a shock for some young people and if they can't cope they will drop the subject or fail.
This year's GCSE results show more pupils taking separate physics, chemistry and biology as opposed to the double award combined science. Most teachers see the three separate subjects as a better preparation for A-level science. A much lower percentage of candidates in these get grades D and below than in the supposedly easier double award science - suggesting that the bright kids are being entered for the separate science route.
Meanwhile Jim Sinclair, director of the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) which represents the exam boards, says he wants more students to "come out of the exam with a feeling of success that they have actually tackled a significant proportion of the questions". That means a greater number of "low demand questions," including multiple choice from next summer.
But the real solution is more (and better) science teachers and I'm not convinced the way to nurture the next generation is low demand questions.
