ATTENTION
Science, Technology, Engineering and Math
(STEM)
Education
CAUCUS
STAFFERS:
November
2006 News Briefs on STEM Education
In
this Issue:
2.
No test tubes? Debate on virtual science classes
8.
Newly introduced STEM Education Legislation
Countries reporting higher levels of enjoyment and confidence
among math students don't do as well in the subject, the study suggests. The
results for the
Internet-based educators are seeking to convince the board,
and the public, that their virtual laboratories are educationally sound,
pointing out that their students earn high scores on the A.P. exams. They also
say online laboratories are often the only way advanced science can be taught
in isolated rural schools or impoverished urban ones.
3.
Americans sweep Nobel prizes so far
(AP 10/4)
4.
Foreign enrollments at graduate schools Increase, reversing a 3-year decline
(Chron. Higher Ed. 11/1)
Total foreign enrollments at American graduate schools increased by 1 percent
this fall, after three consecutive years of decline. In what is seen as a
particularly promising sign, the number of new foreign students increased by 12
percent, suggesting that total enrollments should continue to rise.
(report)
Many scientists argue that the solution to the tension between science and
society is to increase public understanding of science. But the problem is not
simply a lack of comprehension.
6.
Cora Marrett
to become Assistant Director for NSF Ed. and Human Resources
(more
info)
Cora B. Marrett, the
7.
Scientists say video games can reshape education
(Seattle
Times 10/18)
Capping a year of study, the group called for federal research
into how the addictive pizzazz of video games can be converted into serious
learning tools for schools. The theory is that games teach skills that
employers want: analytical thinking, team building, multitasking and problem
solving under duress.
Recently
Introduced STEM Legislation
This
is a record of recently introduced legislation related to STEM Ed. but does not
represent Caucus endorsement of any legislation
Total foreign enrollments at American graduate schools increased by 1 percent
this fall, after three consecutive years of decline. In what is seen as a
particularly promising sign, the number of new foreign students increased by 12
percent, suggesting that total enrollments should continue to rise.
The findings come from a survey scheduled for release today by the Council of
Graduate Schools. The 177 institutions that participated in the poll, conducted
in September, include more than two-thirds of the 50 schools with the largest
foreign enrollments, the council said. Enrollments of foreign graduate students
fell sharply after the
On a separate issue, the survey found a growing willingness on the part of
American graduate schools to consider admitting students who hold the new
European three-year undergraduate degrees.
The increase in total foreign enrollments was led by newly entering students
from
The gains were concentrated in certain fields, with increases of 22 percent in
engineering programs, 10 percent in business, and 5 percent in the physical
sciences.
"These findings confirm that there has been a recovery in
international-graduate-student flows to the
"The increases reflect positively on both
In response to numerous complaints about the problems foreign students and
scholars faced, the government has gradually improved the visa system and
reduced waiting time for obligatory interviews in
In an interview, Ms. Stewart said that American graduate schools had made
"dramatic changes" in order to better recruit and support foreign students. She
noted that 79 percent of graduate schools surveyed by the council last June
reported that they had taken at least one such initiative over the previous
year.
Ms. Stewart warned against complacency. "While the news is very good," she said,
"the fact is that we are still losing total market share," as other nations
step up their efforts to attract international students.
Loss of market share is inevitable, she said, since the number of student places
in graduate-education programs worldwide continues to grow, including in the
big sending countries of
In the recent survey, American graduate schools reported that they remained as
selective as ever and that the quality of the foreign students they enrolled
had not declined. Still, cautioned Ms. Stewart, "we need to be vigilant to
attract some of the best students."
The survey also found a significant decline in the number of American schools
that refused to consider applications from students who hold the new European
degrees. The three-year "
Fifty-six percent of graduate schools said this fall that they would consider
admitting holders of those degrees, compared with only 41 percent in a similar
survey a year earlier.
POINT OF VIEW
In spite of some apparent victories for science - like the primary election
that should install a mostly moderate State Board of Education in Kansas, which
in turn should mean an end to the effort to include intelligent design as a
theory in science curricula for the state's public schools - scientists
may be losing ground with the public on such vital issues as the teaching of
evolution or the need for research on stem cells.
The abutment of science with moral or religious values is straining the
relationship between science and society. The National Science Board reports
that a large majority of Americans (more than 70 percent in every survey since
the early 1970s) still believes the benefits of science outweigh its risks to
health or the environment. Yet many Americans don't understand science. Almost
half believe that astrology is scientific and do not think that humans evolved
from other species. More than half believe in extrasensory perception.
Many scientists argue that the solution to the tension between science and
society is to increase public understanding of science. But the problem is not
simply a lack of comprehension. The case of stem-cell research is instructive:
It is not that opponents do not understand somatic-cell nuclear transfer; they
do grasp the fundamental nature of the process, and they don't like it. The
notion of destroying an embryo, no matter how noble the cause, conflicts with
their core religious beliefs about when life begins, and its sanctity. More
education would not be enough.
Simply lamenting the tension or protesting attacks on the integrity of science
and science education won't work, either. We've been doing those for decades,
if not centuries, and, as the saying has it, insanity is doing the same thing
over and over and expecting a different outcome.
Instead of simply increasing public understanding of science, scientists need to
have a real dialogue with members of the public, listening to their concerns,
their priorities, and the questions they would like us to help answer. We also
need to find ways to move science forward while adapting to their legitimate
concerns.
Sometimes called the public-engagement movement, that approach has taken hold in
That principle is extremely difficult for scientists
to accept, as debate is such a central part of the scientific enterprise.
Moreover, we in science believe that facts always will win out. But again,
ideologues are not bound by the facts, and there is a limit to the number of
times one can accuse one's opponent of fabricating or distorting facts before
appearing overly aggressive and losing credibility with the audience. Those of
us who were involved in early discussions of evolution and intelligent design
learned the hard way that by debating advocates of ID we inadvertently gave
them scientific authenticity.
That is another principle scientists find hard to
accept, as they often have strong moral values. When a scientist brings
personal views on, say, the beginning of life into a supposedly scientific
discussion on the use of embryonic stem cells in research, his or her
credibility as a source of neutral facts is automatically diminished. No matter
what a scientist believes about moral issues, if an opponent in a debate
introduces values or beliefs, the scientist should disclaim any ability to
comment on those issues as outside the scientific realm.
We also need to stop expecting people to come to us
at our universities or conferences. Scientists should volunteer to meet with
local religious groups, fraternal organizations, and school groups. And they
should include in their discussions with those people the relevance of their
work for everyday life.
It can take a great deal of time to reach out to
local groups. But that is the best way of getting our work understood by those
who support it through their tax dollars, and on whose behalf we ultimately
conduct our research.
Public engagement works best when scientists and
members of the public work together in smaller groups to discuss and develop
solutions to real-life problems. Effective techniques have been described by
Daniel Yankelovich and Ruth A. Wooden, leaders of the nonprofit group Public
Agenda - a nonpartisan opinion-research organization that sponsors civic
engagement to help Americans explore and understand critical issues.
Yankelovich spelled out their philosophy, and how it might be applied to
science, in the summer 2003 Issues in Science and Technology.
The Center for Public Engagement With Science and Technologywhich is part of my
organization, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciencehas held
town-hall events, including one designed to provide science teachers from
middle and high schools with information about intelligent design, an effort
covered by The Chronicle ("On
the Front Lines in the War Over Evolution," March 10). A similar event
on global climate change, designed to help high-school students and teachers
understand the issue and keep them interested in science, is planned for the
February 2007 AAAS annual meeting in San Francisco. We also have played host to
occasional salon-type, informal discussions between well-known scientists and
members of the public, and we have dispatched representatives to meet with
church and synagogue groups.
It is not yet clear whether the public-engagement approach will significantly
reduce the tension that is weakening science's relationship with society. But
at a minimum, it should bring scientists into closer proximity with their
fellow citizens, which in turn should give each group a far better
understanding and greater empathy for the perspective of the other. That is a
critical first step toward any real progress.
Alan I. Leshner is chief executive officer of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science and executive publisher of Science.