5th February 2013 9:00
By Blue Tutors
After plans were released to withdraw higher funding for A-level sciences, Science Community Representing Education (Score) sent a letter to ministers speaking out against this. In it, they claim that such subjects cost much more to run that most other A-level subjects. Due to a 12% cut, the lobby group are worried that this will dissuade schools and colleges from offering these more expensive subjects.
According to the chairman of Score, Professor Graham Hutchings, the group have learnt that all academic subjects studied by 16 – 19 year olds will be funded at the same base rate. Although the government denies that funding will be cut, the professor warns of the negative consequences of such a decision. Smaller schools may have to abandon teaching the subjects altogether while others might be forced to reduce teaching time, carry out less practical work or employ staff with less experience.
Score is a group that speaks on behalf of science teachers and is made up of five other member organisations. These include the Royal Society of Chemistry, Biology and Physics and the Association for Science Education. They believe that because the sciences are practical subjects, they are naturally more expensive to run than others. Not only do they need laboratories, but they also require technicians to set up specialist equipment and deal with the daily running of the lab.
The Skills Minister, Matthew Hancock, replied to the letter indicating that the weightings for various subject programmes were not removed but revised. He claimed that such a change was needed due to the over-complicated nature of A-levels funding. Mr Hancock was not convinced by this response and is requesting more modelling to be carried out which will measure the impact of such a change.