MOVES to make chemistry in schools more appealing to girls by introducing skin care, perfume, cosmetics and nail varnish to the syllabus have sparked claims that the move could “further gender stereotype” young women.
Teachers contacted The National to express concerns that they felt “uncomfortable” telling their classes that the new higher chemistry course and exam would have a more feminine touch in a bid to encourage more girls into science, and some female students said they thought it was “sexist”.
Equate Scotland, an organisation which supports and encourages women into careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) also raised concerns about the changes.
Director Talat Yaqoob said: “I appreciate what is being attempted here to engage girls in science, but we must be weary of not further gender stereotyping what interests girls in Scotland – this will only exacerbate the problem of gender inequality”
“It is quite right that we go to more effort to engage girls in chemistry but the solution to that is not to further gender stereotype what girls will be interested in. The priority needs to be changing the culture within a classroom so that all education is more inclusive rather than making assumptions about what girls are or are not interested in.”
Several teachers raised concerns about the 2017 higher chemistry course and the content of the higher chemistry 2016 paper, which has sections on shellac nail varnish and skin care.
The past paper reads: “Modern shellac nail varnishes are more durable and so last longer than traditional nail polish. The shellac nail varnish is applied in thin layers to the nails and then the fingers are placed under a UV lamp.
“The Skin Care Foundation has recommended that a sunblock is applied to the fingers and hand before using the lamp. Suggest why the Skin Care Foundation makes this recommendation.”
One teacher said he had to inform his class that there would be more questions about cosmetics and skin care in the 2017 exam as part of a plan to encourage more girls to take chemistry but he felt this sent out the wrong message.
He said: “When I told the class that we’d be studying cosmetics, skin care and fragrances, and the reasoning behind it, some of the girls were, quite rightly, taken aback and appalled at the gender stereotyping going on here. While we want to encourage more girls to take the subject, I think this is taking it a bit too far and I know quite a few other teachers who feel the same. I felt a tad uncomfortable about telling pupils why there was an increase in the study of female products.”
One pupil said she felt “patronised” after being told that chemistry would have a more female focus and they would be learning about skincare and cosmetics.
She said: “I was appalled when I heard this. My classmates and I didn’t choose chemistry to learn about the chemicals used in nail varnish, make-up or perfume. Most girls who are going for higher chemistry chose the subject for National 5 so I don’t think this would encourage more girls to stay with it or try to crash a higher.”
The SQA, responsible for setting the new higher exam, refused to discuss why this year’s chemistry course was more focused on female products.
However, an SQA spokesman said: “Curriculum for Excellence represents a different approach to learning and assessment and in the way education is delivered.
“As part of that approach, courses are designed to enable the subject to be experienced and applied through many different contexts which are relevant to learners. The higher chemistry course builds and assesses understanding and knowledge of chemistry and its applications in everyday contexts and industrial applications of chemistry.
“The gender balance in terms of uptake of higher chemistry is approx- imately equal in terms of boys and girls.”
The Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) teaching union said there had been efforts in recent years to make STEM subjects more appealing to schoolgirls, with “some degree of success”.
The Scottish Government spokesman said: “This year roughly the same number of boys and girls took the higher chemistry exam. We want both boys and girls to be inspired by science subjects and consider the rewarding careers that could follow.”
Marked for deportation: The Home Office try to split up another Highland family
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here