Hansard

I apologise to the Presiding Officer and other members in the chamber for the fact that both I and Nanette Milne were late for the debate. Part of the explanation is that no Business Bulletin was available when we left for committee meetings this morning and, when we checked again at lunch time, none was available, so we were unaware that the debate had an earlier start time.

I regret that an amendment to the debate was not selected. On Thursday last week, several members were privileged to listen to a group of pupils from Perth high school who had come to Parliament to press their case for a higher in geology—one of the subjects that is under threat of being discontinued by the Scottish Qualifications Authority in 2015. They argued strongly that geology is a subject that brings together so many different aspects of scientific inquiry, and one which could hardly be more important when it comes to the future of earth sciences and the Scottish economy. Indeed, I felt that their case was persuasive.

Despite the fact that I am firmly wedded to the social sciences, I cannot stress enough the intrinsic educational value that the study of science brings to our students throughout our schools, colleges and universities. Science—as opposed to the arts and social sciences—provides a distinctive discipline of positive inquiry that is quite different from that in other subject areas.

It is abundantly clear that Scotland is at the cutting edge of many research projects in science. However, it is also abundantly clear that we need to do much more to encourage a greater uptake of the STEM subjects—particularly by women, as members on the Labour benches have pointed out—and to ensure that there is a greater understanding of how those subjects can be applied in modern industry and commerce.

Science encapsulates what is around us as human beings as well as what is around the planet. The growing breadth of its inquiry, thanks largely to the application of increasingly sophisticated technology, is in great demand and is both exciting and creative. With greater diversity required in the energy industries, the debates about climate change, rapid changes in communications and transport and the significant challenges within the health industry, there is no end to the need for well-trained scientists and engineers.

Dr Robin Wallace, head of the institute for energy systems at the University of Edinburgh, has spoken about collaboration and about how it is so crucial. He says:

“in addition to advances made in wave and tidal energy at Edinburgh, Heriot-Watt and Robert Gordon Universities, researchers at the University of St Andrews have made exciting new breakthroughs in energy storage”.

He talks about the collaboration when it comes to

“developing new types of lithium batteries”,

which he is of the opinion will

“have a major impact on the future ... of scientific application.”

There is similar success at the University of Dundee. According to the latest Thomson scientific rankings, it has achieved the greatest impact in molecular biology and genetics and in biology and biochemistry of all UK universities. That is a significant achievement.

Those are just two areas that will significantly enhance Scotland’s prospects for the future and we must do everything that we can to ensure that those institutions can recruit top-quality science students and staff. Our colleges and universities, as well as our industries, play a crucial part in developing the groundbreaking ideas that are so essential to Scotland’s economic growth.

Likewise, we all know that the future success of an increasing number of companies in Scotland is underpinned by scientific knowledge and its practical application. Electronics has become a vibrant and dynamic industry, significantly contributing to meeting the changing needs of other industries such as automobiles and defence. Seventy per cent of Scotland’s exports come from the science, engineering and technology-related sectors and yet the oil and gas industries have expressed their concerns about skills shortages, and a recent OPITO survey of companies in Aberdeen identified finding talent and skills shortages as the number 1 challenge to their future competitiveness. That is an important warning.

Scotland’s science centres and festivals play a crucial role in making science more accessible to all age groups and for that reason we are happy to support the Government’s motion. Nonetheless, we believe that we need to enhance that attraction and do more to ensure that there is a stronger and more diverse science qualifications network that will meet the academic needs of pupils and students right across Scotland. It is about not just boosting the profile of science within the curriculum but ensuring that we make it as easy as possible for students to gain qualifications and work experience in the related industries.

To return to the question of geology, it is a subject that ought to lead to a wide variety of degree options and professional training for graduates for a range of industries, many of which are critical to Scotland’s long-term plans—particularly in the fields of oil and gas, mining and renewables. Job prospects and graduate employment for those students are high, with above-average salaries, yet very disappointingly the SQA is looking to discontinue the geology higher in 2015. That decision is based—probably not surprisingly—on the very low numbers of the SQA candidates in 2011 and 2012.

The argument is that attention should be focused elsewhere, on the subjects where there is much greater demand. However, we should be very careful about how we make such assessments—a point that was put to us by Ruth Robinson of the University of St Andrews last Thursday. She has made plain her view that the low uptake is driven by the very low numbers of teachers supporting the subject. Remarkably, no new teachers have been trained since 1985. That statistic is deeply worrying, particularly given the growing scope for earth sciences within the curriculum for excellence and the number of pupils who would like to do the subject if only they could be given the chance.

If we dig a bit deeper, we find that 13,000 from just over 100 schools have been involved in the geobus outreach programme that is run by St Andrews university. That is much more akin to the ratios that we would expect if we look at Wales, Northern Ireland and England, or at some European countries, such as Norway.

One pupil made the interesting point that there is hardly a more interesting and exciting country for geology than Scotland, so he rightly posed the question of why our uptake is so poor. If there are latent reserves in our mineral ores, there is also latent talent in our pupils, and it would be a great pity if they could not be allowed to develop those talents just because there is insufficient support for staff who want to teach the subject. I hope that the SQA might be persuaded to review its decision.

I conclude by noting that science is hugely important to us all. It is encouraging to see a growth in the number of conferences and festivals showcasing the best in Scottish scientific achievement, but that in itself will not be enough to deliver for pupils whose futures will be in the science industries. Those pupils and their teachers need to know that the curriculum for excellence will provide opportunities that are supported in the same way as other subjects are. Everything possible must be done to provide the relevant qualifications so that we have both the number and the quality of science graduates that Scotland needs for the years ahead.