Ian Pearson - STEM Partnership conference
The Royal Society, London - 21 May 2008

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Good afternoon. I must admit to some wariness about speaking at this point in proceedings. It's not simply the prospect of an audience sitting back in their chairs with full stomachs, but with their thoughts possibly wandering elsewhere. As the late Douglas Adams observed, "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."

Still, I am delighted to have this opportunity to discuss the direction of STEM education with such a wide range of people involved in its delivery: from charitable foundations and the learned societies, from industry and from government itself. Indeed, we should be proud of what we have achieved.

A gathering of this diversity is essential as we seek to provide better, more effective support for teaching science, technology, engineering and maths. To build a single, coherent framework whose ultimate purpose is to ensure that our economy, our society, our democracy all benefit from a national strength in science.

Why STEM matters

Now, I do believe it's worth reiterating why the STEM agenda is so important to us all - not least because it reflects the thinking behind the creation of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills just under a year ago.

DIUS itself is testament to our ambition to develop this country's skills base, so we produce generation after generation of talented young scientists and technologists necessary for the UK's future. At the highest level, that means further strengthening our research base, so we remain world leaders in both pure and applied science. And harnessing both that talent and that scholarship, to support innovative business, inform policy-making and address some of the fundamental challenges of the 21st century.

More than that, however, a scientifically-literate public is, in my view, an unalloyed good. With a decent understanding of evidence and risk, people are in a better position to make informed decisions for themselves and their families. They can contribute to political and ethical debates surrounding such complex issues as GM foods, biometric data, nuclear energy and embryo research - and put appropriate pressure on people like us, which is, of course, the ultimate test of our democratic process. And where a society has the confidence to engage with new technology, it tends to drive innovation through consumer demand, rather than something imposed from above on an unsuspecting and potentially sceptical public.

Progress made

Since DIUS came into being, and over recent years, I would argue that we've made good progress towards developing a modern knowledge economy and a Britain that's more positive about science.

In December, we announced a major increase in the science budget over the next three years to maintain our position as the most scientifically productive and efficient nation in the G8. In March, the Science and Innovation White Paper demonstrated a new intent to exploit the benefits of research and knowledge transfer for both our economic and social wellbeing. Across government, the great majority of departments now have a chief scientific adviser in post - opening policy development to challenging input from the science community.

There's also a positive story to tell in terms of STEM education - which will effectively determine the long-term sustainability of the progress I've just outlined.

Thanks to sustained investment, overall attainment in GCSE, A level, first degree and postgraduate results are on an upward curve.

Growing numbers of pupils taking science AS and A-level has fed through to greater success in FE and HE. UCAS figures show significant increases in applications to study STEM subjects.

In schools, we now have more science graduates teaching science than ever before - thanks to more bursaries, "Golden Hellos" and better teacher training.

From September this year, all pupils with an aptitude for science will be able to study triple science at GCSE, giving them every option to pursue careers where a solid STEM grounding is fundamental. And allied to that, the Department for Children, Schools and Families have recently launched a three-year campaign in schools to improve STEM-related careers advice.

Of course, none of this has been achieved by schools and colleges working in isolation. It has been about working in partnership.

Science and Engineering Week 2008 was a huge success, with some 3,500 events attracting an estimated 1.4 million attendees from all walks of life.

STEMNET, sponsored by DIUS, has been a vital resource for teachers and pupils in the classroom and far beyond. Science and Engineering Clubs have raised aspirations and broadened young peoples' horizons.

The Science and Engineering Ambassadors programme - now 18,000 strong - is the epitome of effective partnership working, with businesses of all sizes contributing enthusiastic and expert volunteers to serve as role models in schools.

Given its success, I'm pleased to announce today that we are significantly increasing our investment in this programme, and have set a new target of 27,000 ambassadors by 2011. And besides this substantial increase in numbers, we will be looking into new ways to improve the diversity and effectiveness of all those acting as ambassadors - of whom half are currently women.

Meanwhile, SEMTA, the Sector Skills Council for science, engineering and manufacturing, have published UK-wide agreements covering the Automotive, Aerospace, Electronics, Marine and Bioscience industries. SEMTA has also been instrumental in designing the new 14-19 Diploma in Engineering available from this September, and another Diploma in Manufacturing, available in 2009.

What next?

At the same time, none of us can afford to be complacent. We should continue to ask ourselves the question: what next? This audience is only too aware of the importance of maintaining the UK's position in science at a time of fierce global competition. Other countries are making deliberate attempts to increase their capabilities, win a greater share of international R&D - and train more home-grown scientists.

In light of the Roberts Review of 2002 and last year's Sainsbury Review, there's no question that our ability to compete depends on a healthy supply of well-educated and enthusiastic supply of scientists, engineers and technicians. People who can meet the high-level skills needs of businesses; who can undertake fundamental research in our universities and science parks; whose grounding in STEM will benefit other sectors and the economy as whole.

The challenge

So the challenge - and I would emphasise that it is ongoing - is to produce a framework where stakeholders can work together towards shared priorities but where they also retain the freedom to innovate and pursue their own interests. This is about offering proper room to manoeuvre both inside and outside government, not being prescriptive. It's about collaboration, not competition.

It remains the Government's responsibility, of course, to ensure that our schools and colleges are well-staffed and well-equipped. We will continue to invest in specialist infrastructure - the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics, the Science Learning Centres, and STEMNET - and we will support a range of enrichment and enhancement activities.

But in building on those foundations, employers and the charitable sector have a great deal to contribute. I know that you've already heard about several partnerships which are helping to advance the STEM agenda. They include Project Enthuse, the Wellcome Trust's excellent new bursary scheme enabling teachers to attend the National Science Learning Centre and further their professional development. I'm delighted that, in his budget speech, the Chancellor promised £10 million to match contributions for Project Enthuse.

This framework for STEM must be able to facilitate a range of partnerships at every level - from individual schools collaborating with local firms, through to regional and national initiatives involving UK-wide bodies, charities and international companies.

So what should be our priorities moving forward?

First, I think we can do more to take your views on board. Here the STEM High Level Strategy Group, which represents key stakeholders, is already having an effect, and I'm pleased that, through the STEM Advisory Forum, it is being revamped to give a stronger voice to the wider community of STEM partners.

The second, related point is that we need broaden participation in the STEM agenda beyond those of us already involved. This conference is part of that - discussing ways to attract participation among smaller industries and organisations. Forging links between universities and the schools on their doorstep. This doesn't mean doing more of the same, but increasing the variety and effectiveness of STEM partnerships, enabling providers to offer a more accessible and streamlined range of STEM initiatives that truly meet the needs of our young - and not so young - scientists and engineers.

And third, we must make it simpler for STEM partners to see where their input is most needed - and easier for schools to identify where they can get the support they require. There's no shortage of resources to support STEM teaching - quite the opposite. What is needed is a way to make priorities clearer for funders, and access easier for teachers. That's what the STEM framework is designed to achieve.

Working in partnership gives us a real opportunity to improve existing communications channels between STEM partners and schools, and be much clearer about exactly what's on offer.

Again, I think we're moving in the right direction on this front. With the pilot for a community of STEM portals unifying existing sources of information. Through the Government-funded initiative in which STEMNET and the major scientific societies are creating directories for schools and colleges listing enhancement and enrichment initiatives. And, thanks to the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, establishing the National STEM Resource Centre for teachers at the National Science Learning Centre.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I've no doubt that we can achieve so much more by working closely together. After all, we do share a common vision to see more young people inspired by science, technology, engineering and mathematics - and determined to study it post-16. More women and minority ethnic groups involved in both science and its governance. A British public that recognises the importance of science to our economic and social well-being.

I will have more to say on STEM and on public engagement with science as DIUS prepares its Science and Society strategy - and I will be canvassing your views once more during the consultation phase, which we will be launching in the coming weeks.

In the meantime, I urge you to advance the practical concept of partnership working on STEM and - to extract maximum value from this conference - offer your opinions on how the new, coherent STEM Framework can best support your activities and long-term plans.

It only remains for me to thank you all for listening - and to thank the sponsors of today's event: The Royal Society, The Royal Academy of Engineering and BP, together with The Gatsby Charitable Foundation, The Wellcome Trust and BAE Systems.

I'd now be happy to listen to your comments and answer any questions you may have.