When the Arts-Science divide becomes government policy

The arts-science divide used to be a thing in British universities. The artsy (humanities and languages) undergraduates looked down on the nerdy scientists, and the scientists considered themselves a good deal brighter than the average arts student. That divide began to fade when even artsy students began to regard nerdiness as cool and respectable thanks to Bill Gates and the dotcom bubble of the 1990s.

Even before that the divide had begun to blur with the growing popularity of the social sciences . Subject fields grew up which combined the old humanities with scientific enquiry. Nowadays it is hard to say where economics, psychology, anthropology or geography would sit in the old arts/science divide. The rise and rise of joint honours degrees and combinations like physics with philosophy or engineering with Chinese have further smudged the edges.

But now the old division has returned with a vengeance, with the UK governments’ proposal to fund the old STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) from taxes as part of its review of higher education funding, while leaving the humanities wholly dependent on fees charged to students.

Humanities students could, under current proposals end up paying £6000-£9000a year for an undergraduate degree, while Scientists may have lower fees, subsidized by government funding.

The arts-science divide has suddenly remerged in sharp focus. All learning is not equal. The arts and humanities are being divided again, this time by the monetary value put on them by policymakers.

Some humanities students have seen the writing on the wall already. Many try to hedge their bets by combining history, say, with economics or business in order to increase their earning power in a market that is saturated with humanities graduates but values economics and finance. That they do this at all shows a pragmatism about the humanities and the sciences that simply did not exist in the era when ne’er the twain would meet.

Those who have watched these trends over decades say there is no doubt that there will be a shift towards the sciences at undergraduate level if the current proposals become policy. The surplus in humanities graduates will soon disappear, and we could see some not very motivated science students, mainly intent on getting an affordable first degree rather than pursuing science. The big shifts from the pure sciences into economics and business degrees that occurred in the 1990s could well be reversed in the scramble for an affordable degree.

So where will this new divide take us? There could be some creative solutions such as new hybrid degrees that compromise funding with inclination for the humanities – chemistry with history, mathematics with law, for example, so that the chemistry and mathematics part will be taken in subsidized ‘science’ departments and perhaps reduce the cost of a full degree.

Or will courses like Psychology and Geography become ‘sciences’ with more modules of biology in Psychology and more geophysics in geography in order to qualify for government money and attract more students?

And who will teach the humanities in schools? Will there be enough good, inspirational English and history teachers who genuinely passionate about their subjects? The situation where economics graduates are hired to teach maths A level because of a shortage of maths teachers may become a thing of the past. In 30 years time we may either be importing history teachers from other countries, or history will be taught in schools by people with a maths degree topped up with a year max of history training.

Interesting that this should be happening at a time when China and Singapore have realised that they may have overemphasized the sciences, and that to have good managers and civil servants they need to develop the teaching of humanities and social sciences in their universities. They see the limitations of technocratic management. Singapore has invited in Yale University to set up a liberal arts campus. Hong Kong's universities are shifting to four-year degrees so that students can get a strong grounding in the liberal arts in their first year, before specialising.

The real problem, whether in Britain or Asia, is the huge difference in attitudes towards the humanities on the one hand and the sciences on the other by governments and policy makers. What we really need is a mixture of both and of individuals passionate about their chosen subject rather than forced by economic circumstances or government diktat to chose another calling.