WEDNESDAY 11 JULY 2007

JIM KNIGHT MP, IAN PERSON MP AND RT HON MARGARET HODGE MBE MP

  Q70  Chairman: Good morning. Could I give a very special welcome to the three ministers this morning, Jim Knight Jim Knight MP, Minister of State for Schools in the Department for Children, Schools and Families, Ian Pearson MP, the new Minister of State for Science & Innovation in the Department for Innovation, Universities and Science—

  Ian Pearson: Skills.

  Q71  Chairman: Skills, sorry.

  Ian Pearson: But science is extremely important. It runs right through what we do.

  Q72  Chairman: A Freudian slip in my notes! Finally, but by no means least, a very good friend, Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MBE MP, Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Could I welcome you all and thank you enormously for coming at such very short notice to this one-off session about science and discovery centres. I will start by asking you, Ian, how the science centres fit into the Government's commitment to increasing the STEM skills within the UK. Do they play an important role in that?

  Ian Pearson: Jim might want to say something on that in detail but I would like to say, as Science and Innovation Minster of ten days' standing, that it is very clear to me, when I look at my brief, that we have made tremendous advances when it comes to investment in science over the last ten years. I think we have seen a step change in our innovation performance in the United Kingdom. Where we perhaps have been weak is that I do not think we have done enough to promote the importance of science. The whole science in society agenda is very important to me and will be for the future. Science and discovery centres potentially are already playing an important role in popularising science, raising awareness. I was totting up, having gone through the Ecsite website, the number of science centres I have been to and the total was 14. They are very different. It is important to recognise that when we are talking about science and discovery centres they can vary from the Eden Project at one end, to Thinktank in Birmingham, which is a fantastic resource and does very well indeed, to some of those based in museums in London and a whole range of projects up and down the country. There is no one particular science centre model. They do contribute in different ways and I am sure individually they will vary in terms of the way they are run and their cost-effectiveness and how they contribute to the STEM agenda and how they contribute to the wider promotion of science agenda.

  Jim Knight: I was trying to tot up my total as well.

  Margaret Hodge: So was I.

  Q73  Chairman: We are not going to have a competition!

  Jim Knight: I think I got to 11—it is right that he should be the Science Minister as I did not do as many as him! Obviously science is a huge priority for the Government as a whole and for us within DCSF, the STEM agenda is something that we take very seriously in contributing to that priority and trying to raise the general level of skill and understanding in respect of the STEM subjects. We spend just shy of £174 million on that particular agenda, most of it through schools. The science and discovery centres play an important role in engaging the general public and, often directly, small children, through visits with science in a way that is engaging. In terms of educational outcomes of children, we know the involvement of parents is very important and science and discovery centres are a great place for parents to take their children and together learn more about science. That is great. That is really important.

  Q74  Chairman: In terms of the reworked objectives for STEM subject development with which you were involved with last year, what is the progress there? Do you feel in any way that the science and discovery centres have played a part in achieving your overall objectives? Are we seeing progress? Are we reversing the trends in terms of A-level physics and chemistry?

  Jim Knight: We are seeing some progress, yes. We are doing considerably better in biology and psychology. We have improved things significantly in chemistry, in that things are now more stable than they were. We are not seeing the same declines in people studying chemistry that we used to. We continue to have a problem with physics. We still have good numbers of boys studying physics, and all the sciences, including physics, are relatively popular, but we have a persistent problem in respect of girls being engaged with physics. We funded, with Ecsite, this evaluation of the science and discovery centres with what was DTI and which would now come out of Ian's budget, I think. One of the things I will be looking for when that reports in March is whether or not there is evidence that they are having an effect in the numbers of students wanting to study STEM subjects at any level. Obviously if they are doing particular work on particular priorities, like girls studying physics, then I am going to be particularly interested.

  Q75  Chairman: Did you look at the Scottish model at all when you were looking at evaluating the science and discovery centres to see whether there were lessons to be learned?

  Jim Knight: Obviously I would hope and expect Ecsite to be looking at that as part of their evaluation. Scotland, as I understand it, has had mixed success. They do some direct funding but they do not fund them all, and there are some centres that have financial trouble, as there have been in England as well. My understanding of the Scottish situation is mixed but different. That is one of the joys of devolution that we celebrate every day.

  Q76  Chairman: I will bring Margaret in and then come back to you, Evan. Margaret, are the science and discovery centres in your view cultural? Is the main objective of them cultural or is it educational? Where do you see your role fitting into supporting them?

  Margaret Hodge: I think I am here in somewhat of a supportive role.

  Q77  Chairman: Have you been to any, by the way?

  Margaret Hodge: I have not got through the list. I have done about eight or nine but I have not looked at it in detail. I am here in a supportive role. I think our interest comes from a number of areas. One is that some of the science centres are in museums, so I have an interest there because I have responsibility for museums. Secondly, many of them are visitor attractions, and, therefore, with my tourism hat on I also have an interest in them there. Thirdly, as members of the Government we are all interested in promoting the importance of science, so I support my two colleagues in that regard.

  Q78  Dr Harris: When we had Lord Sainsbury before us last year, he said that the Government, to implement its STEM objectives, was putting money in but it was putting it into science and learning centres. I would be interested to know whether you are aware of any measure or evaluation of the effectiveness of that investment in meeting your objectives, of getting more people studying STEM subjects at A-level, level 6, Key Stage 3 and all those other objectives or whether that is still to be done.

  Jim Knight: I do not have the evidence at my fingertips on that, Evan, but, if you look at the money, of the £173.6 million that we spend on STEM, £143 million goes directly to schools, there is then £8 million that is spent on science clubs and the remainder is spent on CPD—and obviously a big chunk of the £143 million that goes to schools is also spent on the continuous professional development of teachers. At the heart of improving STEM learning is improving STEM teaching, getting teachers engaged and excited and refreshed about their subject. That is why, with the Wellcome Foundation, we have invested £51 million in these learning centres, one of which, for example, at Bristol, in the South West, works with and as part of a science and discovery centre. So the two can align, but it is very much about trying to deliver that, to get maths teachers, science teachers and engineering teachers re-engaged and excited about the subject.

  Q79  Dr Harris: The point I am making is: would you be open to the argument that just relying on the CPD side, through science learning centres, in order to meet these objectives might be missing, if there is an equal amount of evidence, an alternative way, which is to excite young people formally and informally through science and discovery centres. That is a possible way of achieving your policy.

  Jim Knight: I certainly accept that. I accept that in respect of all forms of learning. We have published the Learning Outside of the Classroom manifesto and we have over 400 different organisations signed up to that manifesto to encourage and facilitate more learning outside of school. It might be just outside in the school grounds, but, equally, it is going on trips to things like science and learning centres, because we do recognise that that different form of engagement can work very well.