This
message is being circulated at the request of Caucus Members. We are happy to
circulate to Caucus staff information on letters, legislation, or events
relating to
ATTENTION
(STEM)
Education
CAUCUS
STAFFERS:
February
2007 News Briefs on STEM Education
In
this Issue:
2.
'What Works' Reviewers Find No Learning Edge for Leading Math Texts
3.
Many Want Career, NASA's mission: Make space cool
4.
How Low Teacher Quality Sabotages Advanced High School Math
7.
Newly introduced STEM Education Legislation
For
the third year in a row, funding for technology and integrating that technology
into the classroom are the biggest challenges that school districts face in the
area of technology, according to a survey issued by the National School Boards
Association (NSBA).
A
draft report approved by the Commission on 21st Century Education in STEM calls
for a nationally coordinated effort to improve teaching in science and
mathematics.
6.
NSF Issues Impact Report on Math and Science Partnership Program
(NSF News 1/27)
The
National Science Foundation (NSF) has released its first national impact report
assessing the NSF Math and Science Partnership (MSP) program, which was
established in 2002 to integrate the work of higher education with K-12 to
strengthen and reform mathematics and science education.
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
|
H.CON.RES.34
|
|
Title:
Honoring the life of Percy Lavon Julian, a pioneer in the field of organic
chemistry research and development and the first and only African American
chemist to be inducted into the National Academy of Sciences.
Sponsor:
Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [D-TX-30] (introduced 1/18/2007)
Cosponsors:
12
Committees: House Science and Technology
House Reports:
110-4
Latest Major Action: 2/1/2007 Passed/agreed to in
Senate. Status: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a
preamble by Unanimous Consent.
|
H.R.677
|
Title:
Sponsor:
Rep Holt, Rush D. [D-NJ-12] (introduced 1/24/2007) Cosponsors:
23
Committees: House Energy and Commerce
Latest Major Action: 1/24/2007 Referred to House
committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
|
H.R.694
|
Title:
To establish a digital and wireless network technology program, and for other
purposes.
Sponsor:
Rep Towns, Edolphus [D-NY-10] (introduced 1/24/2007) Cosponsors:
8
Committees: House Science and Technology; House
Education and Labor
Latest Major Action: 1/24/2007 Referred to House
committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on Science
and Technology, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Labor, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
The
Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) Education Caucus' primary
mission is to promote all areas of STEM Education including K-12, higher
education and workforce issues in Congress. At its core, the caucus functions
to increase the visibility and importance of STEM Education and educate Members
of Congress and their staffs on the technical issues and public-policy options
surrounding STEM education. The Caucus serves as an information source and a
catalyst for improving STEM education.
If
you would like to join the Caucus, please contact Julia Jester (x53831) in Mr.
Ehlers' office or Wendy Adams (x52161) in Mr. Mark Udall's office.
Published:
January 24, 2007 Updated:
January 31, 2007
As the
federal What Works Clearinghouse rolls out long-awaited ratings on the
effectiveness of math programs for the elementary grades, one trend is becoming
clear: Most major commercial textbooks can't yet muster the proof that they are
any better than their competitors at improving student achievement.
Of
four reviews published by the online clearinghouse since September, only one
elementary school math program has received even a qualified nod from
evaluators for its research record.
Yet
while publishers and textbook evaluators are concerned about the message those
lukewarm effectiveness ratings may send, they also say the ratings may have
more to do with the clearinghouse's strict reporting system than with the
programs themselves.
See
Also
Read
the related story,
"Guidelines for 'What Works' Contract Signal Shifts."
The
What Works site says a handful of rigorously conducted experiments show that
Everyday Mathematics,published by Wright Group/McGraw-Hill
of DeSoto,
The
other programs-Houghton Mifflin Mathematics,
Saxon Elementary School Math,and
Scott Foresman-Addison Wesley Elementary Mathematics-were
found in What Works reviews to have "no discernible effects" on learning.
Together,
the four programs represent about half the
The
What Works project favors randomized-control trials-experiments in which a
program or practice is randomly assigned to either a treatment or a control
group-and ignores or discounts most other kinds of studies. ("'One
Stop' Research Shop Seen as Slow to Yield Views That Educators Can Use,"
Sept. 27, 2006.)
That's
a problem for publishers, because the comparison groups in their cases tend to
consist of schools or classrooms using other popular textbooks.
Math
Marketing
Four
textbook series reviewed recently by federal researchers together claim about
half the
SOURCE:
Education Market Research
"It's
very difficult to find significant differences in a one-year study when you're
looking at two programs teaching essentially the same content," said Marcy L.
Baughman, the director of academic research for Pearson Education. The
Boston-based company publishes the Scott
Foresman-Addison Wesley Elementary series, which in December
became the latest math-textbook program to be reviewed by U.S. Department of
Education-sponsored clearinghouse.
Rebecca
S. Herman, the clearinghouse's project director, said such criticisms miss the
point. The clearinghouse, which is funded by the department's
"The
point is: Does one work better? Is one really a star?," said Ms. Herman, the
project director for the clearinghouse. "In math, there's never going to be a
situation where students are not getting a math textbook or some sort of math
curriculum."
Publishers
and some scholars complain, though, that spare judgments such as "no
discernible effect" or "potentially positive effects" give the wrong
impression.
"If a
layperson reads the ratings, he or she is going to think a kid will not improve
with this program," said Mariam Azin, the president of Planning Research and
Evaluation Services Associates, an independent group in
An
experiment could turn up no effects if both the textbook under study and the
program with which it is being compared are equally good-or equally bad-at
improving student learning.
Ms.
Herman said clearinghouse officials are aware of such concerns, which
publishers have been voicing since the ratings system was in the planning
stages. In response, she said, federal reviewers have moved some information
about the composition of the comparison groups from a technical appendix to the
body of the main report.
Still,
the clearinghouse should go further, argued Bill Wilkinson, the vice president
for research for Harcourt Achieve, the Austin, Texas-based company that
publishes the Saxonmath program. He said the What Works site should also put
learning-growth data from studies that are not randomized into its main reports
to give educators and policymakers more information.
"When
you've got so many math programs showing 'no discernible effects,' it really
makes it hard for the education community to make judgments," Mr. Wilkinson
said, "and, really, the clearinghouse is there for the education community to
make judgments."
What's
not yet clear, though, is whether the ratings will carry any weight with the
people charged with selecting instructional materials for schools.
Adding
It Up
Four
math series reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse each claim a sizable share
of the
SOURCE:
Education Market Research
The
curriculum directors in those states said that the official state criteria for
their upcoming adoptions require publishers to ensure that their programs are
research-based. Yet they do not require publishers to submit proof that their
products work, although that could change in
Some
educators at the district level, for their part, have been demanding that kind
of evidence for a few years, in part because of requirements under the No Child
Left Behind Act that programs be research based, according to publishers. Mr.
Wilkinson of Harcourt said he was even asked recently to provide research
showing that students learn more than they otherwise would when they use the
flashcards his company produces.
"If
there's a place where they take an objective view of the research, that's
something I would certainly be interested in," said Lianne B. Jackson, the
textbook and standards program coordinator for Nevada's 65,000-student Washoe
County school district, which expects to adopt new elementary math texts over
the next few years.
But
the bottom line for most districts and states is ensuring that the
instructional programs they choose adhere to local and state standards on what
to teach and when to teach it.
"If
you weren't significantly outperforming your competitor," Ms. Baughman said, "I
don't know that it would keep a state or district from adopting you."
The
What Works Clearinghouse is part of a movement at the federal level to spur
demand for rigorous research attesting to the effectiveness of educational
programs.
The No
Child Left Behind Act, for instance, requires that schools receiving funds
under the law rely on "scientifically based evidence" in choosing a wide
variety of educational programs, products, and practices.
Textbook
publishers, in turn, have responded by commissioning randomized trials of their
products. While the growth in company-sponsored studies has raised some
eyebrows, experts by and large see the mounting piles of evidence as a positive
development. ("Houghton
Mifflin's Sale to Software Maker Reflects Trend," Dec. 6, 2006.)
"Before,
it was definitely more loosey-goosey," said Ms. Azin of Planning Research and
Evaluation Services Associates. But she believes the clearinghouse should
expand the range of research that qualifies as evidence-a change that
clearinghouse operators say they are not likely to favor.
"It's
also dangerous to go to a more formulaic approach, which might be extreme," Ms.
Azin said.
Coverage
of education research is supported in part by a grant from the Spencer
Foundation.
Vol.
26, Issue 20, Pages 1,21
Published:
January 10, 2007
Picture
a jeweler at work. Magnifier in hand, he examines a stone, studying the way
light dances off it. He's trying to determine whether it's a diamond or merely
cut glass, of engagement-ring quality or thrift-store inferiority. How, the
science teacher asks his class, can he tell?
Maybe
the jeweler can tell by the stone's weight, one student suggests. Or its size,
another says.
But
let's assume that stone and another are of equal weight and size, the teacher
responds. What can the jeweler determine from their appearance when they're
held to the light?
"A
diamond gives off a rainbow when cut glass doesn't," a youth says.
This
recognition, even if it comes gradually, is what 9th grade physics teacher
Matthew Anthes-Washburn is looking for. The discussion is the first step in
trying to produce a successful science laboratory-a staple of the high school
classroom experience.
Today's
lesson is on refraction, the way light bends as it passes from one material to
another. Mr. Anthes-Washburn is trying to use students' common experiences to
introduce them to science, before he explains more specific vocabulary and
underlying concepts. The sparkle of a diamond, he hopes, is one such
experience.
After
that introduction, the teacher at West Roxbury Education Complex in
Every
school day, teachers like Mr. Anthes-Washburn seek to build students'
scientific understanding through labs in biology, chemistry, and physics. It's
not easy. A national study released in 2005 concluded that most high school
students are not exposed to high-quality science labs.
Too
often, it found, teachers and curricular materials do not connect lab work with
the rest of science content presented in class. Labs are too focused on
procedure, leaving students unsure about what they're supposed to learn, rather
than improving their scientific thinking, according to the study, which was
conducted by the National Research Council.
Mr.
Anthes-Washburn is trying to overcome those obstacles by making his labs a
primary learning tool rather than a secondary amenity. He and other teachers
using the same curriculum say that it relies on an "ABC" approach-activity
before content. Students first take part in hands-on activities so that the
science content presented later will have greater meaning.
That
model is essentially the reverse of how labs are used in many science
classrooms, where teachers lead students through lectures and content upfront,
before sending them to lab activities. Mr. Anthes-Washburn says his goal, by
contrast, is to promote inquiry-a broad term that generally means having
students gain scientific knowledge through the activities and processes used by
scientists, such as observation, investigation, and the interpretation of data.
"It's
a truer model of scientific thinking," Mr. Anthes-Washburn says of the
approach. "In the field of science, if you're in a lab, you don't have a fixed
outcome" in which researchers are presented with the correct answers at the
outset. He wants to gradually build students' ability to conduct science over
the course of a year.
Teachers
and scientists have long recognized the importance of labs in science lessons.
By the mid-1800s, educators began to see a need to teach high school and
college students more about the methods and procedures used by scientists, as
opposed to simply having them read about that work, or hear it described by
teachers, the NRC report notes.
Cracks
in the Test Tube
The
National Research Council found that most students are not exposed to effective
labs. The NRC study cited a number of reasons for labs' shortcomings.
*
Poor school facilities and organization.
Many schools lack the space for labs; others have overly rigid schedules that
do not allow students to participate often enough for labs to have a positive
impact on learning.
*
Weak teacher preparation.
Teacher colleges and other universities provide educators with little training
on conducting effective labs; professional-development activities for veteran
teachers are limited in quality and availability.
*
Poor design.
Many labs are not designed with clear learning goals in mind, and are
disconnected from the flow of science lessons. Students are not encouraged to
discuss their preconceptions about scientific topics before, during, and after
labs.
*
Cluttered state standards.
Influential academic documents encourage schools to cover long lists of science
topics by grade and offer little guidance for including labs in the flow of
classes.
*
Little representation on state tests.
Science assessments given by states do not gauge student skills in using
labs-which contributes to the lack of attention they receive in schools.
*
Scarce evidence of what works.
Little research exists on what types of labs are most effective; scientists and
researchers even disagree on how to define a science lab.
SOURCE:
National Research Council
Today,
high school students on average take part in one lab activity per week in
science class, research shows. Yet disagreements persist on the most effective
way to structure labs and how to balance them with straightforward, teacher-led
presentations. Little definitive research is available on what works best,
experts say.
"Everyone
will tell you that labs are essential," said David P. Licata, a chemistry
teacher at
Nonetheless,
the committee of scientists, teachers, and academic researchers identified a
number of effective strategies for organizing labs. Those steps include having
teachers clearly spell out the purpose of an activity for students; explicitly
linking those activities to the content presented in class; and prodding
students to discuss the overall scientific meaning of activities, rather than
simply the procedures they followed.
It
places a heavy emphasis on labs, while introducing students to physics in 9th
grade, in contrast to the more traditional approach of having them take it as
juniors or seniors. The district greatly increased professional development in
an effort to improve teachers' use of labs and overall skills, Ms. Decker said.
Arthur
Eisenkraft, who helped write the Active Physics curriculum, said that in too
many schools, labs are held well before or after-sometimes weeks after-a
teacher presents a lesson because of either instructional reasons or scheduling
conflicts. Active Physics is aimed at ending that disconnect, said Mr.
Eisenkraft, a professor of science education at the
"The
lab is an integral part of the class," he said. "It's not an added-on part."
Active
Physics drew criticism recently from parents in the
Supporters
of Active Physics maintain that it provides all students with the opportunity
to take a science subject traditionally reserved for elite students, and gives
them a better foundation for studies in chemistry and biology.
Paul
R. Gross, a professor emeritus of life sciences at the University of Virginia,
said curricular models that put a heavy emphasis on labs can work-as long as
those activities do not become an excuse for students to simply "do something
easier" than learning challenging science content. Mr. Gross led a 2005 study
by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation that was critical of states' emphasis on
"inquiry-based" instruction. Labs can boost students' enthusiasm for science,
he said-but teachers should provide firm guidance and high expectations
throughout those activities.
"You
need to teach science," Mr. Gross said. "The teacher is not [just a]
facilitator. The teacher is a resource and an example."
Mr.
Anthes-Washburn, who is in his sixth year of teaching, is trying to offer
direction to a diverse group of students, many of them from disadvantaged
backgrounds.
West
Roxbury Education Complex was broken up a year ago into four smaller high
schools, and he works at the Parkway Academy of Technology and Health, which
focuses on integrating technology into other academic areas. Seventy-eight
percent of PATH's student population is eligible for free or reduced-price
lunches. At the 10th grade level, just 52 percent of students achieved at least
a "proficient" score on
Scott
Bartholomew, a 9th grade science teacher who works down the hall from Mr.
Anthes-Washburn, says many of his students struggle with basic scientific
vocabulary-terms such as "acceleration" and "velocity." While his students
resist reading and writing exercises, they are more enthusiastic about labs,
which he uses to prepare them for unfamiliar terms.
"It
gives them an access point" to science, Mr. Bartholomew says. "The way I
learned science was through a book. That was my access point." Labs can "draw
kids in," he says. "If they're not interested in what you're telling them,
they'll just tune you out."
The
attempt to use labs to build content knowledge was on display in Mr.
Anthes-Washburn's class one recent day. Students leave their desks and regroup
at small tables in threes and fours. With hand-held laser pointers, they direct
beams of red light at pencil-length glass rods, with acrylic blocks behind
them. The laser ray bends one direction, then another. The students then record
their observations.
"That's
the angle of incidence," the teacher says, pointing to a spot on one group's
graph. The class will review the term later, along with other definitions.
Kostandina
Bullari, 15, says labs have helped her connect science to everyday activity.
She took part in what she considers her favorite lab a few weeks before, when
students constructed miniature houses and tried to insulate them, to study the
movement of hot and cold air.
"When
we do projects from the book, it's work," Ms. Bullari says, "but I like the
experiments."
Building
a Better Lab
Researchers
have identified a few strategies for creating effective hands-on activities
that will improve students' science learning.
*
Clearly stated purposes.
Students must understand the explicit goals of a lab in order to understand the
science behind it and carry it out effectively.
*
Effective sequence.
Labs should be connected to what students learned before-and after- that
particular hands-on activity. They should be integrated into instruction,
rather than presented as isolated events.
*
Blending of content and process.
In conducting labs, teachers should emphasize both scientific content in their
classes and the processes used by scientists in their work.
*
Discussion and reflection.
Students in a lab should be encouraged to discuss and reflect on those
activities. They should be asked to develop explanations and make sense of
patterns in data--not just confirm ideas that a teacher has presented to them.
SOURCE:
National Research Council
For
Mr. Anthes-Washburn, the hard work comes in keeping an entire class on task,
two weeks before his school's winter break. Some groups won't start the
activity until the teacher prods them. If he isn't watching, students will
begin talking, or doodling on their laptops. When one comes back from the
bathroom, another asks for permission to go. One young man who refuses to work
is asked to leave class so Mr. Anthes-Washburn can talk to him in the hallway.
Coping
with the steady disruptions isn't easy, the teacher acknowledges after class.
But despite the ruckus, students who participated have been given an important
foundation that will make the next day's science lesson seem a little less
abstract, he predicts.
"I
still win," Mr. Anthes-Washburn says. "Tomorrow, when I teach about refraction,
they'll have had that physical experience. ... My goal is to get everybody to
have contact with it. If everyone can get the big idea, that's a success."
Coverage
of new schooling arrangements and classroom improvement efforts is supported by
a grant from the Annenberg Foundation.
Vol.
26, Issue 18, Pages 24-26
Wednesday,
January 24, 2007
The
draft report was approved last week by the Commission on 21st Century Education
in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, which reports to the
National Science Board, the policy-setting body for the National Science
Foundation. The science board must sign off on the report before it becomes
final, which could happen by May.
One
draft recommendation is for the development of a single, national standard for
the certification of schoolteachers in math and science. In turn, accreditors
of college teacher-education programs should consider how well the programs
prepare graduates to obtain those certifications.
Commission
leaders said they hoped the draft would satisfy explicit requests from members
of Congress, including members of the House of Representatives Committee on
Science, for the panel to offer discrete steps for action. The new draft
recommendations respond to a steady drumbeat of commentary over the past two
years that
Over
all, the document estimates no price tag for its suggestions, although one will
probably be added to the final draft, said Elizabeth Strickland, the
commission's executive secretary.
Members
of the new Democratic majority in Congress have already filed bills to carry
out some of the ideas contained in the draft, although tight constraints on new
federal spending make the prospects for passage uncertain.
The
draft calls in part for expanding existing federal efforts to help students
attend college to become teachers. One is the NSF's Robert Noyce Scholarship
Program, which provides funds to college students studying math and science if
they agree to become schoolteachers after graduation. The draft also suggests
that the federal government forgive the college loans of those students.
The
report describes the existing educational system in math and science as
"fractured and disjointed both within school districts and from state to state,
placing at risk the ability of students to learn to high levels."
For
example, "in our geographically mobile society, students who move from one
location to another may miss learning a critical fundamental concept in one
school system and never be exposed to that idea again," the draft says. As a
result, many students enter college without adequate preparation for course
work in math and science, it says.
To
remedy that problem, the report calls for the development of a voluntary,
national set of standards for school curricula in those fields. The No Child
Left Behind Act requires each state to develop standards in math and science,
and to begin testing students' achievement in them, starting in the 2007-8
school year. The report suggests that, in addition, the federal government give
states extra aid if they adopt the proposed national standards for student
achievement and teacher certification.
Colleges
could support those efforts by ensuring that the schoolteachers they graduated
were prepared to teach students in accordance with the national standards, the
report says.
While
the new standards could show "what does a highly qualified teacher look like,"
they would not spell out a single curriculum for universities to use, said
Shirley M. Malcom, a co-chairman of the commission that wrote the report. The
15 commissioners on the
panel (five of whom are academics) respected the independence and
diversity of colleges and so left it to them to work out those particulars
themselves, said Ms. Malcom, director of education and human resources at the
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Colleges
do have a "pivotal" role to play in improving school teaching nationally, she
said. The panel's members realized, she said, "that unless we addressed the
issues in higher education, nothing could happen."
Elaine
Seymour, a research associate at the
Although
there is plenty of good academic research suggesting new teaching approaches
that work, faculty members are resistant to change, said Ms. Seymour, a
co-author of Talking About Leaving: Why
Undergraduates Leave the Sciences (Westview Press, 1997).
Enhanced
incentives for prospective teachers, like loan forgiveness, might persuade
students to "blow off" the discouragement, she said. So could a sustained,
national advertising campaign to attract science majors who weren't otherwise
considering teaching.
Some
of the report's recommendations have been made in previous reports, with
limited success. For example, to achieve greater consistency in teaching, the
report calls for a national coordinating council that would work with federal
agencies and the states. Each state should also have its own coordinating
council, including colleges as members.
Such a
national council was recommended in the last major national report on science
education, in 2000, written by a panel led by John Glenn, the former astronaut
and
Other
reports have endorsed statewide coordinating councils. But only about half the
states have established them.
The
National Science Board, which last convened its own national commission to
examine science education in 1983, is scheduled to discuss the new draft in
February. The board may amend it, add explanatory text, and issue a final draft
for comment by the end of March.
Copyright
(c) 2006 by The
Chronicle of Higher Education
return to top