Should it be mandatory to pass the sciences?

What do you think? A basic knowledge of science is considered to be vital for our everyday lives. Currently, the two subjects in which a pass is compulsory are English language and mathematics, which is fair and understandable, since we don't really want people to be innumerate and illiterate. However, wouldn't you say that knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics at a GCSE standard are just as important?

EDIT: I mean passes in biology, chemistry and physics!

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 1

Loci Pi

16

I agree, although not all schools offer GCSEs in separate Sciences. My school only offered Combined Science so you wouldn't get a different grade for each Science, meaning if you were really good at one but really bad at another you could still pass.

Reply 2

Nitura

9

Not all students are able to pass Maths and English, especially since there are new changes in place with the syllabus and how they are graded. Not everyone wants to go into science-based careers, a basic knowledge in Maths and English is necessary for everything , physics?Not so much.

No.

Original post by Tolgarda

What do you think? A basic knowledge of science is considered to be vital for our everyday lives. Currently, the two subjects in which a pass is compulsory are English language and mathematics, which is fair and understandable, since we don't really want people to be innumerate and illiterate. However, wouldn't you say that knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics at a GCSE standard are just as important?

100% how would you form ideas about things without at least a bit of science.

Reply 5

Tolgash

OP

21

Original post by DrawTheLine

No.

How come?

Reply 6

DrawTheLine

22

Original post by Tolgarda

How come?

The things you learn taking triple science don't really have an impact in your life. Sure you learn important things but most of it I haven't touched since completing the exams 3 years ago. I don't see why forcing people to resit subjects they don't need would be beneficial.

Reply 7

Tolgash

OP

21

Original post by Loci Pi

I agree, although not all schools offer GCSEs in separate Sciences. My school only offered Combined Science so you wouldn't get a different grade for each Science, meaning if you were really good at one but really bad at another you could still pass.

Combined science should provide adequate knowledge. The bar would just have to be raised a little bit, so only a ‘strong’ pass (grade 5-5) would allow you to avoid a resit, while a ‘standard’ pass (grade 4) in each of the three separate science courses would suffice.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 8

StriderHort

21

So what's the mandatory part? expulsion/criminal charges if you fail?

Reply 9

Tolgash

OP

21

Original post by DrawTheLine

The things you learn taking triple science don't really have an impact in your life. Sure you learn important things but most of it I haven't touched since completing the exams 3 years ago. I don't see why forcing people to resit subjects they don't need would be beneficial.

That's true, but people should at least progress after year 11 while having actually understood what they learnt in science. I wouldn't consider someone failing to achieve a pass in any of the sciences as having understood what they have learnt. It is important to understand what you have learnt in science, even if you only may use a fraction of that knowledge. Some people only use a small amount of knowledge they learnt from GCSE maths after they don't study it further, that doesn't make stop it from being crucial.

Reply 10

Tolgash

OP

21

Original post by StriderHort

So what's the mandatory part? expulsion/criminal charges if you fail?

Resits if you fail. Just like with GCSE maths and English, you must pass the subject to progress further in education.

I also do believe it is actually a legal requirement to take maths and English language until you get a grade 4 or turn 18...

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 11

Volkerbund1933

18

I disagree. Surely in that logic GCSE politics must become mandatory, since having a basic knowledge of politics is considered vital, as it affects our everyday life. There are many subjects that could be made mandatory and for me sciences do not stand out that much for it to be made mandatory

Reply 12

bluemuffin

21

Maybe, but only double science standard because any more knowledge won't be important to many in their future careers (triple science should still be an option though). Also like many exam boards demand, people should have (successfully) done a set list of basic core practicals in biology, chemistry and physics as I think that that's just general knowledge.

Reply 13

StriderHort

21

Original post by SomMC1

If you cant get a pass, which if you cant then that's purely the student's fault, then you cant continue in further education & the person can enjoy less than minimum wage.

I think that's a fair trade.

Well its either 'In someones interests' or 'Mandatory/Compulsory', they aren't the same thing.

Why on earth would you feel this would allow someone to be paid less than legal minimums? there's a reason it's a legal minimum.

Reply 14

Doones

21

Original post by Tolgarda

What do you think? A basic knowledge of science is considered to be vital for our everyday lives. Currently, the two subjects in which a pass is compulsory are English language and mathematics, which is fair and understandable, since we don't really want people to be innumerate and illiterate. However, wouldn't you say that knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics at a GCSE standard are just as important?

Maths is a science. :beard:

Reply 15

Tolgash

OP

21

Original post by Doonesbury

Maths is a science. :beard:

Crud. I didn't think it was! Well I've edited my post now to show that I mean biology, chemistry and physics when I say 'sciences.' :smile:

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 16

Muserock

18

I think you could argue that a number of subjects are " considered to be vital for our everyday lives". Modern Languages enables businesses to integrate globally and therefore, having employees be bilingual could be considered vital. Another example is History as learning our mistakes of our past, avoids making the same mistakes in a future which could be considered vital. Being able to cook could be considered vital. You could argue that with a lot of subjects. However, if you start making subjects mandatory, it means less choice for students and doesn't allow students to do well in the areas that they are all interested in, enabling our society to flourish in many areas.

Reply 17

username2763536

15

Yes.Our entire civilisation is built upon science and technology so people should understand the basics.It also teaches critical thinking so when people start going on about pseudoscience like astrology you know why they are wrong.People have the vote.How are they supposed to vote on important issues like climate change and genetic engineering if they don't know the basics of science? Plus the one thing this world does need is more humility and I can't think of a better way to teach that than by teaching astronomy.Maybe if people realised how small and insignificant they really are they'd be less arrogant and treat each other nicer.

Reply 18

RickiestRick

9

Original post by Tolgarda

What do you think? A basic knowledge of science is considered to be vital for our everyday lives. Currently, the two subjects in which a pass is compulsory are English language and mathematics, which is fair and understandable, since we don't really want people to be innumerate and illiterate. However, wouldn't you say that knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics at a GCSE standard are just as important?

EDIT: I mean passes in biology, chemistry and physics!

Yes, but I believe that each individual subject gets an individual grade. This would provide a basic understanding of science for students, while also making the subject harder at A-level and more competitive for those who want to take up the topic as a career. I also believe that each subject in Chemistry, Biology and Physics should have a separate unit with content that can be selected by individual pupils, so they may specialize in a certain area of science while also providing freedom to the students.

Reply 19

nulli tertius

21

Original post by Tolgarda

What do you think? A basic knowledge of science is considered to be vital for our everyday lives. Currently, the two subjects in which a pass is compulsory are English language and mathematics, which is fair and understandable, since we don't really want people to be innumerate and illiterate. However, wouldn't you say that knowledge of biology, chemistry and physics at a GCSE standard are just as important?

EDIT: I mean passes in biology, chemistry and physics!

Mandatory means everyone must do it, not just those who could do it but choose not to.

What worthwhile science can we teach to those who can't tie their own shoelaces or who cannot speak English?

The point about maths (arithmetic) and English are that they are basic life skills. That is why we start them in reception class. Although we play at science in key stage 2, it isn't taught seriously until secondary school.

What purpose would be served by inflicting science on those who cannot work at the expected standards of key stage 3?

Should it be mandatory to pass the sciences?

Related discussions

Articles for you