Maths versus the Quick and Easy; Besides There's an Election Coming, Stupid. (April 25, 2007)

    Some three weeks ago over 500 mathematicians sent an open letter to Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, in the hope that it would trigger some active response in order to reverse the downward trend in the quality and quantity of mathematicians in the academic, governmental and business sectors.

Did the Prime Minister or any member of Cabinet Respond?

Did the leader of the Labor opposition or his shadow ministers for science or education respond?

Did any of the media notice?

No!

But take heart we are not alone.

The Guardian's James Meikle reports, "Most [UK] universities have to offer remedial maths courses for new science undergraduates because they are giving up the subject after GCSE [General Certificate of Secondary Education taken between ages 14-16], it was claimed yesterday."

The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) says simply that on the one hand secondary schools are trying to boost their position in league tables by advising their students to opt for easier subjects while on the other teenagers are eager to comply because it'll mean more points toward university entrance.

The RSC's chief executive, Richard Pike, says, ""Increasingly, universities are mounting remedial sessions for incoming science undergraduates because their maths skills are so limited, with many having stopped formal lessons in mathematics two years earlier at the GCSE level. This contrasts starkly with countries like China, in which mathematics is seen as integral to the sciences and to the nation's economy, and is taught to all up to the age of 18. Mathematics tests set in England by many universities for undergraduate chemistry students in their first term to diagnose remedial requirements are disconcertingly simple," and went on to explain that Chemistry professors could not demand maths A-level -- it would lead to fewer applications and consequent reduction in funding because of unfilled places.