I would very much look at the structure, the purpose, the way problems are phrased and the sorts of things that go into the teach- ing of science and math. I would emphasize the joy of science, the pleasure of doing it, the sheer shared fun when suddenly something works or becomes clear.

When teaching math and science in school, teachers have to be careful not to come across like one of the characters in Mordecai Richler's Jacob Two-Two books. I'm referring to Jacob's aunt who lives with the children while the parents are away. She is called Aunt Good-For-You by Jacob and his sisters, be- cause everything she does from breakfast on is prefaced by telling the children "It's good for you." Math and science in school is often taught as if by Aunt Good-For- You. Nothing is done just for the enjoyment of it. You stay with math because it's good for you, you'll get a better job, you'll get to college. Not because it's nice stuff.

Jan: I know I studied science because I thoroughly enjoyed it. But one thing I find myself particularly concerned about now is the need for girls and women to try to understand our technological society, in the citizen scientist role perhaps.

Ursula: Yes, though one has to distinguish between doing science and understanding science. I discussed understanding technology with people in the Faculty of Education here at Queen's. They said that one of their main roles is to teach kids to understand modern technology. I feel that they may be training button-pushers which has nothing to do with students understanding science or technology. Instead, it's pushing a button and saying "Aha!", rather than discovering for themselves. The education system has to figure out what is really required to teach science well. Is it to be housebroken with respect to technology, so that you don't jump up and down because you plug something in and it goes "bzzzzz"? Or is it really to cultivate the ability to do engineering, to design something, to practice that science? I think these are two very separate things.

There will be a lot of befuddlement if everybody has to understand science and draw some consequence from it. For instance, then you would say that anybody who drives a car ought to understand how an internal combustion engine works. If this were so most problems of urban congestion would be solved, because there would be such a nice limited number of cars on the road. Instead, to get a driver's license, you are tested on the rules of the road so you can safely drive a car without being a hazard to yourself or others.

What educators often want to "produce" are people who are technologically housebroken - able to drive their equivalent of a car in this technological society without saying "why on earth am I doing this?" One has to question what is intended by saying that girls need to retain their math and science in school. Is it for careers? Is it to contribute to a house-broken labour force that doesn't ask inappropriate questions? Or is it genuinely the wish to contribute to civic participation in a technological society? These are all different things, and they are taught differently.

Jan: My concern is that often girls drop science and math so early that they don't have the choice of any of these three options. If you like, they don't even get the basic rules.

Ursula: I'm not sure of that. Schools are not the only place to learn. I have worked with citizen groups on quite sophisticated issues, and haven't encountered any subject that I couldn't not only explain, but get understood to the point that "Mavis" would go to the library and take part in the research. In fact, many of these women become so skilled that some experts get apprehensive of them in public hearings. The whole area of public inquiry is very interesting. For example, two women who spearheaded the inquiry into uranium mining and the pollution of ground water in Nova Scotia were two professors of English. None of the initial advocacy group participants were scientists; many had dropped their math or chemistry in school. There's also a friend of mine who's an authority on alternate energy and energy pricing, and who appeared before the National Energy Board in very technical debates. She is a woman who has taught history at high schools all her life. So the notion that the bus to science comes only around once, and if you don't get math by the age of thirteen you will never be able to understand it, is mistaken. There has to be more motivation for girls in school than to pass their math and science courses "just in case "