-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
1/80
IN THE
NATIONAL INTEREST
THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
IN THE
REFORM
OF K-12 MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
SEPTEMBER
99
Reprinted MAY 993
A Report of the
CARNEGIE COMMISSION
O N
SCIENCE,TECHNOLOGY,
AND
GOVERNMENT
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
2/80
The
Carnegie Commission
on
Science, Technology,
and
Government
was
created
in
April1988
by
Carnegie Corporation
of NewY ork
.
It is
committed
to
helpinggovernment
institutions respond
to the
unprecedented advances
in
science
and
technology
thatare
trans-
forming theworld.The Commission analyzes and assesses
thefactorsthat shape the relation-
ship between science, technology,
and
government
and is
seeking
waysto
make this rela-
tionship more effective.
The Commission sponsors studies, conducts seminars, and
establishes task
forces
to
focus
onspecific
issues. Through
its
reports,
the
Commission
worksto seethat
ideas
for
better
use ofscienceandtechnologyingovernmentarepresentedin
atimelyand
intelligible
manner.
Additional copiesofthis reportmay beobtained
from
theCommission's headquarters.
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
3/80
IN THE
NATIONAL INTEREST
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE REFORM
O F K-12 MATH
AND
SCIENCE EDUCATION
SEPTEMBER
1991
Reprinted MAY1993
A
Report
of the
CARNEGIE
COMMISSION
ONScaBNCB,TECHNOLOGY,
A ND
GOV ERNMENT
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
4/80
CONTENTS
A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S
5
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y
7
P A R T
I : T H E
S O C IA L C O N T E X T
F O R A
F E D E R A L
15
R E F O R M
E F F O R T
P A R T
I I :
I N A D E Q U A C I E S
I N
P R E - C O L L E G E
M A T H
A N D 1 8
S C I E N C E
E D U C A T I O N :
A
C H R O N I C
AND
S E R I O U S
T H R E A T T O T H E N A T I O N S
F U T U R E
P A R T I I I : A S S U M P T I O N S
TOGU IDE
F E D E R A L S T R A T E G Y
AND 20
O R G A N I Z A T I O N
N A T I O N A L W I L L A N D N A T I O N A L S C O P E 2 5
E L E M E N T S O F A F E D E R A L S T R A T E G Y 2 6
P A R T IV: F E D E R A L A C T I V IT I E S IN
K-12
M A T H AND 28
S C IE N C E E D U C A T I O N
C U R R E N T S T R A T E G I E S 2 8
T H E M A J O R F E D E R A L
P L A Y E R S
2 9
M O N E Y
M A T T E R S : F E D E R A L
S P E N D I N G
F O R
R E F O R M
A N D
31
I M P R O V E M E N T
R E S O U R C E S F O R
M A T H
A N D
S C IE N C E I M P R O V E M E N T
3 5
P A R T
V :
P R I O R I T Y R O L E S
F O R T H E
F E D E R A L G O V E R N M E N T
3 8
I N M A T H A N D S C IE N C E E D U C A T I O N
R O L E
F O R T H E P R E S I D E N T 3 8
R O L E S F O R T H E A G E N C I E S 3 9
S P E C I F I C
R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S F O R
F E D E R A L
A G E N C Y
A C T I O N :
3 9
E I G H T K E Y I N N O V A T I O N S
W H O
S H O U L D
D o W H A T F O R M A T H A N D S C I E N C E 4 7
E D U C A T I O N ?
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
5/80
PART
V I:
STRENGTHENING THE KEY FEDERAL AGENCIES 48
T H E
D E P A R T M E N T
O F
E D U C A T I O N
A N D
N A T I O N A L S C I E N C E
4 8
F O U N D A T I O N
O T H E R F E D E R A L A G E N C I E S
4 9
PART VII:
DECIDING
ADMINISTRATION
POLICY A ND 52
OVERSIGHT
A D M I N I S T R A T I O N P O L I C Y
A N D
O V E R S I G H T
5 2
A S S I G N M E N T O F O P E R A T I O N A L R E S P O N S IB I
L I T I E S T O T H E 5 6
F E D E R A L A G E N C I E S
A DoEo/NSF JO I N T O F F I C E FOR
K-12
M A T H
A N D 56
S C I E N C E I M P R O V E M E N T
C O N G R E S S I O N A L
A C T I O N
58
PART
VIII:
BUILDING
ANATIONAL STRATEGYFORIMPROVING 60
MATH
AND
SCIENCE EDUCATION
C L O S I N G S T A T E M E N T
6l
A P P E N D I X : A L T E R N A T I V E A S S I G N M E N T S O
F F E D E R A L M A N A G E M E N T 6 2
R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y
F O R
K-12 M A T H
A N D
S C I E N C E E D U C A T I O N
E N D N O T E S 65
G L O S S A R Y
O F
A C R O N Y M S
7 0
M E M B E R S
O F T H E C A R N E G I E C O M M I S S IO N O N S C I E N C E ,
T E C H N O L O G Y , 7 1
A N D
G O V E R N M E N T
M E M B E R S O F T H E A D V I S O R Y C O U N C I L , C A R N
E G I E C O M M I S S I O N O N 7 2
S C I E N C E , T E C H N O L O G Y , A N D G O V E R N M E N
T
M E M B E R S O F T H E T A S K F O R C E O NK-12 M A T H E M A
T I C S A N D 7 3
S C I E N C E E D U C A T I O N
M E M B E R S O F T H E
A D V I S O R Y C O U N C I L , T A S K F O R C E
O NK-12 7 4
M A T H E M A T I C S A N D S C I E N C E E D U C A T I O N
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
6/80
All
who
have meditated
on the art of
governing Mankind have
been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the
educationoftheir youth.
Aristotle
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
7/80
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report
of the
Carnegie Commission
on
Science, Technol-
ogy,
and
Government
was
prepared
by its
Task Force
on
K-12
Mathematics
and
Science Education
andadoptedby the
Commission
atitsmeetingon
June2 6 ,
1991. Themembersof theTask Forcewere:
LewisM .
Branscomb, Chair
BillAldridge
RichardAtkinson
Garrey Carruthers
Eugene
H.
Cota-Robles
Shirley Hufstedler
David
Kearns*
LeonLederman
Shirley M .McBay
Lauren B.Resnick
F.James
Rutherford
Roland W. Schmitt
Maxine
F.
Singer
Sheila
E.W idnall
The
Task Force established
an
Advisory Councilwhosemem-
bers
were
generous with their criticism
and
advice
and
contributed
many important ideas based
on
their broad range
of
expertise;
however,
the findings of this report are the responsibility of the
Carnegie Commission and itsTask Force. Themembers of theTask
Force and its Advisory Council and theiraffiliationsare listed
at the end
ofthis report. Also listedare themembersof theCarnegie
Commission
onScience, Technology, andGovernmentand itsAdvisory Council.
The Task Force benefited
from
discussions with a number of
government
officials,
among them
J.
Thomas
Ratchford,
Associate
Director, Office of Science and TechnologyPolicy; Walter
Massey,
Director, National Science Foundation; Ted Sanders, then
Deputy
Secretary,Department of Education; Christopher Cross, then
Assistant
Secretary fo rEducational Research and Improvement,
Departmentof
Education;LutherWilliams, Assistant Director,
EducationandHuman
Resources, National Science Foundation; and PeggyDufour
,Executive
Director, Committee on Education and Human Resources,
Federal
Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and
Technology.
TheCommission isgrateful to Dr.Branscomb for his leader-
* David Kearns resigned
from
theTask Forceon May
20 ,1991,
whenhe wasconfirmedasDeputy
Secretary ofEducation.
5
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
8/80
ship, to the members of the Task Force and its advisors, to
RollinB.
Johnson,
the
project director,
and to
David
Z.
Robinson,
who
served
as
principal liaison
to the
Commission
and its
staff.
Joshua Lederberg, Co-Chair
William T.
Golden, Co-Chair
6
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
9/80
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A
large numberprobably
a
majorityof American public
schools
arefailingto
prepare their students adequately
for the
jobs
of
the
future,
fo r
life
in adiverse culture,or for thecivic responsibilities
so
essential
to
democracy.
The
President
and
governors
are
committed
to educational
reform
aimed at improving overly regimented schools
with dispirited teachersandunmotivated students. These efforts
are
meant to
produce fully functional institutions with properly trained,
motivated teacherswho usemodern materialsandteaching methods
increative environments and develop strong
incentivesforstudent
progress.
Unfortunately, that
may not be
enough
for
disadvantaged
students frompoorcommunities.
In the
year 2000, when
the
national
goals agreed uponby thePresidentandgovernors callforAmerican
students
to be
first
in theworld inmathematics andscience, one
Americanchildinfourwillbepoor;onechildinthree willbe
aminority
group member;and onechildintwelve will lacktheEnglish
language
proficiency
requiredfo rlearning. Schoolreformalone willno t suffice
toaddressthese sourcesofdisadvantage. Yet theTask Forceon
K-
12
Mathematics
and
Science Education
is
convinced that education
is
the
besthope
for all
children,
and
that math
and
science
skills
are
especially criticalfo rgoodjobs,fo rfurthereducation,and fo r
effective
participationin anincreasingly technological world. Wealso
believe
that
rapid progressispossible, despitetheaspectsofdisadvantage
that
besetmany schools, students, and families.
The charge given the Task Force by the Carnegie Commission
was to examine how the federalgovernment is organized to
make
decisions
and
implement change
in the
reform
of
math
and
science
education, and to
identify
changes inorganizational structure and
decision-makingprocessesthat will help
the
federal government
to be
an
effective
partner
in
education
reform.
Why
focus
on
math
and
science education whentheschoolsarebesetwith systemic
problems
not
specific
to any
subject
and by
teaching problems
in
every subject
area? There are at least two
reasons
why the federal government
should pay special attention to math and science education:
the
increasing demand for numeracy and problem-solving ability
in
tomorrow's world,
and the
federalgovernment's special responsibility
fo rassuringthenation's technical capabilityto
address
national goals
fo r
the
economy, environment, health,
and
security.
TheTask Force shares with most Americansasenseofurgency
fo r
bold initiatives that will provide real helpto thenation's
schoolsand
renew public confidence that dramatic progress can be made.
There
isno shortage of motivated Americans withgoodideas about how
to
serve our children better. In short supply, however, is the
institutional
7
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
10/80
capacitytoaggregateenoughresources,tobuildanationalconsensus
foraction,andmost importanttopersist withaspecific programof
reform
long
enough
for it to
take
effect,
at
least
a
decade
and
maybe
two.
The federal government should, therefore, support the most
promising initiatives
in the
country
and
build
a
constituency
for
launching themon ascale that will makeasubstantial difference
in
every
school
in America. The Task Force recommendations are
intended
to
help
the
federal government identify
the
bestresponses
to
the challenges andsupportthem more swiftly, wholeheartedly,
and
intelligently.
E L E M E N T S O F A F E D E R A L S T R A T E G Y
The
Task Force devised
a
strategy
for
math
and science
education reformwithfour elements:
Commit tochange bothhow
schools
areorganizedand run
and
what
goes
on
inside
the
classroom.
This requires
the
action
of two
lead agencies,
the
Department
of
Education
and the
National Science
Foundation,
working together through
new
mechanisms
for
collabo-
rationwith each other and with other agencies.
Deploy the resources of the technology-based agencies of the
federal government to improve math and science education and
to
expand
the
supply
of
professionally trained scientists
and
mathemati-
cians serving
the
nation
as
teachers
and
technical professionals.
Leverage state and private initiatives and
support
effective
change through greater emphasison
flexible,
competitivelyevaluated
funding
mechanisms
and the best available understanding of the
education system
and of
teaching
and
learning strategies.
Build
an
informed, broadly participatory,
and
productive
collaborationamong
leaders
ofstatesandcommunities, federal agen-
ciesand Congress,private institutions, and the technical
community,
using avarietyof newinstitutional mechanismstoensure that
federal
activitiesare
both
effective and
supportive.
8
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
11/80
Foremost amongthefede ral responsibilities
is the
leadership
roleof the President
himself. TheTask
Force urges
the
President
touse thefullprestige and influence of his
office
to mobilize all
Americans for asustained,national,bipartisan
reform
effect.
The Task Force developed specific recommendations for
action by federal agencies in the following areas:
Providefully
qualified
mathandscience teachersfor
everyschool by recruiting teachers from under-repre-
sented
groups;
creating
a
single profe ssional pa th
to
either
teaching or practice in mathematics and science; and
enhancing the know ledge, skills, and m otivation of current
teachers.
Decide what students
need
toknow and
know
howto
do by establishing requirements for the jobs of the
future. Engagethe business community, scientists, and
citizens
in
this effort. Develop methods
of
assessment
appropriate tothis goal.
Strengthen educational systems research
andestab-
lishbroad-based supportforbasic cognitiveand ap-
plied learning research
and field
testing
of
innova-
tions. A coordinated reform
effort
requires systems
research
and
system s engine ering based
on the
best
analytical
u nderstanding o f the
K-12
education system.
Ensure
diffusionof
successful innovations:
provide
accessfor allschoolsand allstudentstotested educa tional
improvements and support their successful adoption. Do
not be satisfied with successful demonstrations alone.
Empowerallfederal science agenciesto
take
leader-
ship roles
in thereformof
K
-
1 2 math
and
science
education. Every
science agency of the government
should have
an
explicit education charter defining
its
responsibilities
to
addresspre-collegeissues tha t
lie
w ithin
the agency's special technical expertise and human re-
source requirements.
Encourage
private
sector developmentofeducational
materials,
curricula, textbooks,andsoftwarefor new
educational technology. Educational innovatorsin the
private
sector no t only make significant educational
9
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
12/80
investmentsbut areabletodiffuse innovations throughout
the
country .
Support
sciencecenters
and
museums, educational
television, andothersourcesof informal
educa-
tion. No ntraditiona l education is a powerful way to
motivate studentsand interest parents in the serious study
of mathematics and science and to explode negative
stereotypesof
science
and scientists.
Provideaninformationandreferralserviceto
docu-
ment
innovations
andhelpinnovators
locate
federal
supportfor
K-12
mathand
science
activities.
Indi-
viduals outside the federal agencies have
difficulty
in
locatingthe correct agency through whichto gain access
to prog ram m aterials , services, and inform ation.
WHO S H O U L D Do W H A T ?
TheTaskForce
recommends
thatfederal
science
agen-
cies
playmoresignificantrolesin thereform
effort:
The
National S cience Found ation
should taketheleadin
mobilizing
thenation's universitiesandscience profession-
als to revitalize math and science teacher education,
curricula,ma terials,andtechnology; suppo rt cognitiveand
applied learning research;
and
stimu late science educ ation
in unco nven tional settings.
NSF
should broaden
its
edu-
cationexperience beyond education research.
TheDepartmentofEducation should takethelead rolefor
systemic change,
fo r
educational systems analysis
to in-
form the reform strategy,fo r assessment ofprogress, and
fo r
the diffusion of successful innovations. The Office of
Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) ofDoEd
should help the nation develop a cerebral cortex fo r
education
reform, and
should acquire
the
capability
to
manage the kind of competi t ive, innovative programs
necessary for rapid progress in math and science
reform.
The
Department ofLabor
should become amore active
participant, particularly with regard
to
defining goals
fo r
10
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
13/80
educational content andskillsneededfor thejobsof the
future.
The
Department
of
Energyshould continueitsleadership
of
the CommitteeonEducationandHuman Resourcesof
theFederal Coordinating CouncilforScience, Engineering,
and Technology (FCCSET),and through that mechanism
ensure thatall theR& D-intensiveagencies coordinate
their
contributions tomathandscience educational
progress.
TheDepartment
ofHealthand
Human Services,especially
theNational InstitutesofHealthand theNational Institute
of
MentalHealth, should design
and
carry
out an
appropri-
ate long-range program,
coordinated
with NSF and DoEd,
to ensure the nation's supply of
quality
health professionals
as
well
as itsfuture
health.
TheDepartment
ofD efense
should create model schoolsto
demonstrate its capabilities in educational technology,
processes, and programs;
transfer
them to the private
sector;
and facilitate the
entry
of
demobilized personnel
with
math
and
science training into public school teaching.
Because the math and science reformeffort requires urgency,
vision, and
dynamism,
all
technical agencies should develop
a
more
streamlined
and
responsive infrastructure.
N E W I N S T I T U T I O N S
Besides strengthening existing
offices
dealing with mathand
scienceeducation, the DoEd and NSF should create a mechanism
for
collaborationaJoint O f f i c e for Math and Science
Improvement. It
would report directly
and
jointly
to the
Secretary
of
Education
and the
Directoro f
N S F .
W e
recommend that outside advice
to
DoEd
and NSF
be
channeled through
an
advisorypanelreporting to theJoint
O f f i c e
to
facilitateclosecollaboration between these agencies.
Tosupportthenationalreformeffort,DoEd shouldset up,with
NSF
participation,
a
nationalcenter
or
educationalsystemsanalysis
that
can
serve
as
systems engineer
for new efforts to
accumulate
research knowledge to guide reform, evaluate the
effectivenessof
reform initiatives, and diffuse
best
educational practice; it should
include a clearinghouse fo r educational information.
AFederally
11
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
14/80
Funded Research and Development Center
(FFRDC)
might be the
appropriate institutionalform.
A
nongovernmental
national center for educational content
and
assessmentshould be created, perhaps under the National
EducationGoals Panel, to build consensus on what American
students
shouldknowandknowhow to do, and toassesstheirprogress.
The National Education Goals Panel should be supplemented
by a
council ofeducation
reform
leaders
from
outside government
together with senioro fficials fromtheExecutive Branch,
Congress,and
the states,e.g.,the directors of the Office of Science
andTechnology
Policy (OSTP) and
NSF, chairs
or
staff directors
of key
education
committees
of
Congress, governors,
and
chief state
and city
school
officers.
This council would supporttheworkof theGoals Paneland
would convene a biennialnational conference on educational
im-
provement
sponsored
by either the Goals Panel or byOERIto review
the national strategy on math and science reform, and
theprogress
toward national mathandscience goals.
M O N E Y
M A T T E R S
Given that state and local governments
fund
94percent of
school budgets, the federal government's role inreformshould be
to
leverage state and private investments and
produce change
in the
system,not tosustainit as it is. Thereis
animmediateandsubstantial
need
for
reorientation
of
federaleducationfundingtoward educational
reform.
TheTask
Force recommends that,
as a
long-term goal,
a
designated
proportion (perhaps
10
percent) of
DoEd's program
funding be allocated for discretionary activities aimed at
more
effective
achievement
of
program goals.These activities would
be
devoted to change-oriented, competitive, professionally
reviewed
programs that provide incentives
forreformto
states
and communities.
As
this
flexibility
would allow DoEd programs
to be
more
effective in
serving the intended groups of students, learning in science
and
mathematics
would
be
enhanced along with
all
other parts
of the
curriculum.
This flexibility is
also needed
in the
only existing DoEd
program that targets mathematics and science. To this end,
the
Administration
and
Congressshouldconvertall
the
funding
for
the
Eisenhower grants programinDoEd
to a
competitive, peer-
reviewed program. This would almost doublethe funding
directed
toward enhancingtheperformanceofK-12mathandscience teaching.
12
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
15/80
There
is a
strong case
for
greater priority attention
and
funding
by the
federal
government specificallyformathandscience education.
Indeed, science andmathematicsare theonly areasofschooling
in
whichAmerican studentsareexplicitly intendedby
thePresidentand
governors to become
first
in the world. But in 1991the federal
government budgeted only$515million,oronly4percentof
itstotal
contribution to publicschoolrevenues, directly for math and
science
education.
TheTaskForceconcludesthat moreof thefederal pre-
collegeeducation investment should be targeted to
mathematics
and
science.
The
Task
Force recommends thatall federal
agenciesconcernedwithscienceandtechnology devote some
percentage
of
their
R D
funds
to
math
and
science
education.
Since
the
federalgovernment
is the
largest single employer
of
math
and
science
professionals, it has an interest and an obligation to
reinvest
in theeducation pipeline. These
funds,
too,couldbe administered
througha competitive grants process to encourage the best
innovators
and the best ideas.
M E C H A N I S M S F O R C O O R D I N A T I O N A N D M A N A
G E M E N T
For
oversight
of the
math
and
science reform
effort, tw o
channels
of White House oversight (in addition to the Office of
Managemen t
and
Budget)
are
important.
The
Domestic Policy
Council, with
the
Secretary
of
Education
as
chair
of its
Education
subcommittee,
coordinates overall education policyandshould give
mathematics andscienceahigh priorityin
thestrategy.ThePresident's
Assistant
forScienceandTechnology usestheCommitteeon
Educa-
tion
and
Human Resources (CEHR)
of
FCCSET
as an
extension
of the
OSTP staff
to
encourage
and
coordinate activities
of the
Department
ofEducation and the fifteen agencieswith math
andsciencecontent
in theirmissions.
As
partof thequestfor anintegrated federal strategy,
CEHR
should become
a
standing committee
of FCCSET,
with
a
full-timestaffdevotedto thecoordination ofagency activities
and
the
review
of
agency strategies
for
K-12math
and
science
improvement.
The
Director
of
OSTPshould assign
to an
associate
directorfull-tim eresponsibility
fo r
math
and
science education issues.
13
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
16/80
M E C H A N I S M
F O R
C O N G R E S S I O N A L R E V I E W
The
many congressional committees with jurisdiction
over
DoEd,
NSF,and other engaged agencies should coopera-
tively
review the activities such agencies may undertake to
accelerate
K-12
mathandscience education reform,andgive
priority tomathand science issues
in
the intensified program of
federalaction. Atemporary Select
Committee
on
Math
and
Science
Education might
be a useful
instrument
fo r
this purpose. Where
statutory
limitations hinder promising agency
activity,
they should
be
removed.
Isthere reasonto beoptimistic aboutliftingthecapabilitiesof
American students to first in the world in the next decade?
The
currentsituation holds out great promise of dramatic progress.
On the
other hand, fewareasofsocial development have more often
seen
hopescrushed and cynicism prevail.
The one best hope for success is impassioned, persistent,
nonpartisanleadershipbyevery American abletomakeacontribu-
t ionbut
most importantlyby thePresident. Hiscrusadein thecause
of
education, if taken up by governors, congressional and other
leaders,
and by
presidents
who
follow,
can
turn this situation around.
W ecan
once
again be proud of our
schools
and confident that
future
generations of young Americanswillbeequippedto lead the
nation
to new levels of greatness.
14
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
17/80
PART
I
T H E S O C I A L C O N T E X T F O R A
F E D E R A L
R E F O R M E F F O R T
Thisreport
is
about
the
seriousshortcomings
in
U.S.
mathandscience
education,
andwhatthefederal
government
canandshould
do
in
order
to
play
amuch
more effective
rolein
thenationalefforttoremedythoseshortcomings.
Inadequacies in
pre-college
math and science education are a
chronic and serious threat to our nation's
future.
The national interest
isstrongly bound up in the ability ofAm ericansto compete
technologi-
cally. This requires no t only an adequate supply o f scientific
and
technical professionalsbut awork force abletosolveproblemsand
use
the tools of a knowledge-intensive economy. All young
people,
including
the non-college-bound, the disadvantaged, and young
women, must
be
given
the
opportunity
to
become competent
in
mathematicsand science.
A large numberprobably
a
majorityof American public
schools are failing toprepare their students adequatelyfor
thejobsof
th e future, fo r life in a
diverse culture,
or for the
civic responsibilities
so
essential
to
democracy. This conclusion
is
supported
by
bothexpert
andpoliticalassessment,
1
even though some public schools providean
excellent education fo r college-bound children from middle-
and
working-classfam ilies. Mostfam ilies, infact,think their local
schools
are
finenotrealizing
how
inadequate their children's education
may
be inlightof tomorrow's higher demands forskillsand judgment
.
2
Most efforts
at
school reform, including those
to
which
the
President and
governors
are
committed,
are
aimed
at
improving overly
regimented schools staffed
by
dispirited teachers
and
attended
by
unmotivated
students. These efforts are meant to produce fully
funct ional
institutions with properly trained, motivated teachers
who
use modern materials and teaching methods in creative
environments
and develop strong incentives for student progress. The
current
division of
federal
and state accountability, even with today's per-pupil
expenditures,
may be
able
to
achieve this transformation
in
many
of
America 'spublic schools. Unfortunately,thatmay not beenough fo
r
disadvantaged students
frompoor
communities.
For
the
most rapidly growing segment
of the
children
in our
landthe
poor
and
other disadvantaged childrenpublic schools
and
theother social institutionsonwhich theydependare
failing
toreverse
a
downward spiral that threatens to relegate the
majority
of these
children to a lifetime of
second-class citizenship.
In the
year 2000,
whenthenational goals agreed uponby thePresidentand
governors
call
for
American students
to be
best
in the
world
in
mathematics
and
15
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
18/80
science,oneAmerican childinfourwillbepoor;onechildinthree
will
be a
member
of a
minority group;
and one
child
in
twelve will
not be
sufficiently
proficient
in
English
to
learn without special assistance.
3
The state ofAmerican public education is therefore a
reflection
indeed,avictim ofthenation's social condition. With many
children
in
impoverished
urban communities facing
inadequate
educational
stimulation and even basic nutrition at home, current
financial,
political, and institutional arrangements do not
offer
a means ofescape
from the spiralofdespair. School reform alone willn ot
suffice.
Y etthe Task Force onK-12Mathematics and Science Educa-
tion is convinced that education is the besthopefor all
children, and
that
math and science skills are especially critical for
good
jobs, for
further education, and for effective participation in an
increasingly
technological world. We also believe rapid
progress
is
possible,
despitethe
aspects
ofdisadvantagethatbesetmanyschools,
students,
and families. This report is directed to the federal
government's
opportunitytocontributetothatprogressmuch more
effectively
than
it
does
today.
Thecharge giventheTask Forceby theCarnegie Commission
was to
examine
how the
federal government
is organized to
make
decisions
and
implement change
in the
reform
of
math
andscience
education, and to identifychanges in organizational structure
and
decision-makingprocessesthat will helpthefederal governmentto
be
aneffective partnerineducation reform.Themany Americanswho
are
driving
education reformefforts around th ecountrym ay
feel
thatfew
ideas
for
improvement originate
in federal
agencies. From their
perspective, it ismore importantfor thefederal government to
identify
the
most promising initiatives
in the
country
and to
build
a
constituency
fo r launching them on a large enough scale to make a
substantial
difference in every school in America. Members of the Task
Force
share thissense
of
urgency. Bold
and
dramatic initiatives that will
provide real help
to
schools
may
also renew public confidence that
dramatic improvements
can be
made
in the
nation'spublicschools.
It
has
been
noted before that radical reforms are sometimes
more likelyto beadopted than evolutionary
steps.
4
But theeducation
problem is not a shortage of motivated Americans withgood
ideas
about how to serve our children better: it is a failure to
create the
necessary institutional capacity,toaggregate enough
resources,
and
most importantto persist with
a
specific program
ofreformfo r at
least
a
decade
or
two.
Can the
government
at
federal, state,
and
locallevels
create those institutions,findthose resources, and provide
continuity
of
effort
throughbad timesa swellasgood? Ifnot,ho welse can our
democracy assemble the capacity to act in its own national
interest?
Thus,
while this report
does
highlight a number of challenges
requiring dramatic national action,
its
focus
is on
helping
the
federal
government betteridentify
the
bestresponses
to
those challenges
and
supportthem
swiftly,
wholeheartedly,
and
intelligently.
Wediscuss
16
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
19/80
the m ost-needed improvem ents in the way the
federal
government
encourages, evaluates,an d supports reform.W ehave m
adeaserious
attempttohelpthePresident,hiscabinet, Co ngress,and
thestatesand
communities make better
use of
their resources
by
recommending
ways to increase the institutional capability to attack the
nation's
education problemsspecifically in mathematics and
sciencewith
all the skill, judgment, and organized effort of which this
nation is
uniquely capable.
17
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
20/80
PART II
I N A D E Q U A C I E S
I N P R E - C O L L E G E M A T H A N D
S C I E N C E E D U C A T I O N : A C H R O N I C A N D S E R I
O U S
T H R E A T T O T H E N A T I O N 'S F U T U R E
A
long
series of reports
5
citing
poor
student achievement,
vicious cycles
of
poverty
and
crime, illiterate
and
innumerate
job
applicants, remedial education investments
by
businesses
and by the
military,
unequal educational opportunity,
and
shortages
of
American
scientists, engineers,
and
technicians
are
vivid
and
convincing testi-
mony thatourpublic
school
systemisfailingtoprepare all ouryoung
people for the future, and
that this failing
is
particularly
seriousin
bothdegreeand consequenceinmathematicsand science.
Thereis,
indeed,
aseriousproblem
with U.S. math
andscience
education. When
47
percent
of our
nation's seventeen-year-olds
cannot convert9partsout of 100 to a
percentage,
6
weknow that math
education
is not
working. When
6 3
percent
o f
American adults think
that
lasers work
by
focusing sound
waves ,
7
we
know that science
education
in
this country
is not
working. According
to the
Department
of
Education, only
7
percent
of
high school seniors
are
prepared
fo r
college-level science
courses.
8
A
school system
whose
graduates
are
ignorant about science, repelled by mathematics,and confused
by
technologyis asystem thatis notworkingwell.
9
Many
refertothis state
of affairs
as a
crisis.
If so, it is a
crisis
become
chronic.
Thecrisisinmathandscience education was first recognized
34
years
ago
when
the
Soviet Sputnik could
beseen
crossing American
skies every
96
minutes, reminding
us not to
take
our
technical
excellence
fo r
granted.
A t
that time government
was
primarily
concerned about
the
adequacy
of the
number
and
quality
o f
profes-
sional scientists, engineers,
and
mathematicians
neededto
assure
our
freedom from
a
Soviet threat.
TheN at ional
Defense Education
A ct
(the
source
of the
only
m ajorpre-college
math/science program remaining
inthe
Department
o f
Education today) began
the firstof
several waves
of
education
reform.
In
the past tenyears,theUnited Stateshas experienced two
more majorwaves
o f
educational
reform ,
this time
recognizing
that
a
secureandcompetitive nation must haveabetter-informed
citizenry,
and a
better-trained work
force
prepared
fo r lifelong
learning.
The
alarm of the
early
eighties
10
brought stricter standards,
but no
substan-
tive
change
in how
schools
are
staffed
and
run,
an d
little
positive result
beyond
an
increasingly aroused public.
By
th e
middle
and
late eighties, designs
fo r
systemic change
werewidelyadopted
by the governors,
11
but
there
was
marked
18
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
21/80
reluctance
on the
part
of the
federal government
to
address
the
problem with
the
urgency
it
deserved.
12
The
states undertook many
isolated
innovations,
13
and many governors gave priority attention to
reform.But toooftentheeffortfaded withthe end of agovernor's
term,
theonseto f
hard times,
or the
absence
of aneffective
strategy drawing
on all theneeded
resources, public
and
private, state
and
federal.
The
sustained
effort
to
address
all the
critical,
interdependent elements
o f
K-12
schooling
was notthere.
In
September 1989, the President and governors made a
nu m b er of dramatic commitments at an education summit in
Charlottesville,
Virginia.Among them:
By theyear2000,
U.S.
students
will befirst in the
world
in scienceand mathematics achievement.
Governors, congressional leaders,
and
Administration
o fficials
14
are
now working together through the National Education Goals
Panel,
andindependentlythroughproposedlegislation,
to
reach that goal.
What does first
in the
world
in
science
and
mathematics
mean? In
terms that
are
relevant
to an
America
in
rapid
demographic
transition,
15
i t
means
a
level
o f
math
and
science competence that will
best prepare
all
Americans
for the
kinds
of
jobs that produce
a
competitive and growing economy, keep our citizenry informed
and
capable
of
self-government,
and
ensure that U.S. scientists
and
engineers are as creative and productive asthoseof any other
nation.
16
The TaskForcebelievesthat mathan dscienceeducation should
receive
priority
attention
as a
specific
focus area
in
federalpre-college
education reform initiatives.However,matha ndscience
educational
improvementmustbeundertaken in thecontextof
systemic
reform of
K-12 education as a whole:teacher
capability
and
diversity,
school
structure and management, and student motivation.
Federal
pro-
grams in general school
reform
and in math and science education
should
beconcurrent, coordinated e f f o r t s .
19
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
22/80
PART
III
A S S U M P T I O N S T O
G U I D E
F E D E R A L S T R A T E G Y
A N D
O R G A N I Z A T I O N
Americanschoolshavebeensubjected to
pressures
forreform
since at least the 1920s. Acentral paradox of education ...
isthat
schools, possibly more than any institution in our society,
are
constantly changing
inresponseto
external
pressures;yet
theynever
seem to change in ways that satisfy
reformers.
17
Throughout this
historythere runs a contrast between the urgency, enthusiasm,
energy,
creativity,and
serious
effort
that reformers have brought
to the
task,
and theslow,
ineffective,
short-livedefforts todiffuse local successes
to other schools.
Eachreform effort
was
rapidly supplanted
by the
next new
idea.Reformshave beenbasedon simplistic rather than
sophisticated
understanding of teaching and learning; they have rarely had
the
benefit of anoverall strategy. Systemic changehas
been
preempted
byclever butfleetingandrelatively superficial change, towhich
the
education system ishighly resistant. Progress hasmore
often
faded
away than endured.
But
the urgent, serious efforts of teachers, administrators,
parents,andcitizensaremorevitalthan everto a
newreformagenda.
The
challenge
is to
engage
all
elements
of
communities
in the
e f f o r t
and
give their commitment abetter chanceto beeffective thanever
before.
The federal
government can,
if
properly
staffed,
organized,
and
missioned, make a decisive contribution to that end.
Thefollowing assumptions underlie our recommendations on
how the federal government should decideits strategy for math
and
science education improvement,
how it
should organizeitself
to
carry
out
that strategy, and how agency missions should be allocated.
There
is notimeto waste.
Not all
children
are
receiving
adequate preschool education,and in anycase none of
thechildren
benefitingfrompreschool intervention today will have graduated
from
high school by the year 2000. Childrennow entering
elementary
school will encounter many teachers with weak educational
back-
groundsinmathematicsandscience. The NationalScience Teachers
Association estimates that only about 35,000of the 1million
elemen-
tary school teachers
are
specifically trained
for
math
and
science
teaching.
Accordingtoleading professional associationsinmathand
science education, 67 percent of elementary science teachers
have
inadequate course preparationinscienceand
82percentaredeficient
in m athem atics.
18
Everyschool day, studentsinthese grades cometo
school naturally curious about the world and go home having
learned
20
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
23/80
to
hatescience
and
mathematics
a
little more.
The graduates of the class of 2000 have already finished
third
grade.
How can
these
graduates
expect
to be
best
in the
world
in
science
if,
when they reach middle school, they
find
that
86
percent
of
themath teachersand 69percent of thescience teachers
fallshortof
standards for course-work preparation set by professional
associations
ofmath
and
science educators? When they reach high school, will they
still
find
that71percent oftheir biology teachers,69percent oftheir
chemistry teachers, and 88 percent of their math teachers
have
substandard preparation intheir subjects, as is
thecasetoday?
Considering
the
magnitude
of the
problem,
it is
clear that
extraordinary
efforts,
both shortandlong term, willberequiredto
help
children inevery grade during this decade.
With
adequate remediation,
current
studentsin allgradescanmakeup forlost ground,but itwill
take perhaps another decade before each child benefits fully
from
improvementat alllevels, preschool to 12th grade,and
remediation
becomes much less necessary.
Deepandeffectivechangein theK-12educationsystem
is neededif the goalis ever to be
met.
There is widespread
agreement that most Americanschoolshave limited control
overhow
they teach,areencrusted with bureaucracy,and
arefrequentlystaffed
with
inadequately prepared and motivated teachers who teach out-
dated curriculaand usestrategies drivenbyinappropriate testing.
This
agreementhascreatedareceptive climateforsome radical
institutional
experimentation. However,reformwill
be
verydifficult
to
accomplish
withthe resources now available, since most state education
budgets
are in
crisis,
and
federal contributions
to
K-12 education(discussed
in
Part
IV) are
modest
by
comparison.
The
most immediate priority
is to
achieve much greater leverage withthe
funds
nowavailable. Change
is
also neededin thecapabilitiesof thefederalagenciesand
thepolicies
thatguide them if the federal government is to be a fully
effective
partner
withthestates,theprivate sector, and concerned citizensin
achieving
the national education goals. Growing evidence of the
deepening commitment
of the
business community
to
education
reformmakes
it
pa rticularlyimportant that federal agencies
be
able
to
take advantage of private-sector experience in identifying
weaknesses
and
implementing structural change
and
effective management. This
is already occurring at the state level, where a number of
chief
executive
officers
oflarge corporations affiliated withTheBusiness
Roundtable have teamed up with governors to institute
essential
elements ofreform instatepolicy.
19
Studentperformancewillnotimprove
nationally
until
the
teacher
forceis
improved nationally.
Who
will teach science
and mathematics to the graduates of
2000?
Will they befullyprepared?
Over60percent of juniorhigh school principals report
difficulty
in
21
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
24/80
hiring
physics, chemistry, and computer science
teachers.
20
Currently,
30 percent ofU.S. high schools offer no physics courses,
17percent
offer
no chemistry courses, and 70 percent
offer
no earth or
space
science courses. Fewer than50percentofhighschoolgraduatesof
the
classof1987 took chemistry,andonly about20percent took
physics.
Only 7 percent of high school graduates evaluated in a national
study
bytheDepartmentofEducationhad thepreparation
needed
totake
college-level
courses
in science.
These dismal statistics paint a picture of students
whose
educational
opportunities
are far
below what
the
nation
can and
should sustain. This is not surprising when one considers that
their
teachers have come from
the
sameschools
and
thatthose
who
enroll
in
college-level teacher training generally come
from
the lower levels
of high school academic performance. A high priority must be
accorded tohelpingtheteacherswehaveandattractingthebestnew
talentto teaching.
Reformstrategies
must
beinformedby
the best
available
understandingof the
education
system and ofteachingand
learningpractice. That understanding must reston asound
baseof
education researchand onevaluationofwhat works, whatdoesnot,
andwhy. Recent advances ineducation research
havethepotential
toimprove mathematicsandscience education greatly. Basic
research
incognitive science isrevealinghowpeoplelearn mathematicsand
science, how thelearning context affects learning,andwhat
barriers
m ay
block understanding. Thepotentialfor abreakthroughinlearning
effectiveness
is there. But too littleeffort hasbeendevoted to applied
research, to bringing these ideas into realistic school settings
and
curricula,testing themin the field, andimplementing those that
work.
Even under the best ofcircumstances, translation of major
research
insights into practice takesalong time.
Effective
educational
innovations
must
be
available
to all
schools.
Aconspicuous shortcomingof
reform
efforts todateis the
absenceo feffective incentives and facilitiesfo r the
diffusion
ofbetter
teaching methods, content goalsandcurriculum materials
designedfor
them,andsupportservices for
teachers.
Pastexperience showsthat
man y innovations are quite successful, but their rate of
adoption by
other districtsispainfully slow. Toreachthenational
goals,oreven
to come close, agreatly accelerated rate
of
diffusion
of
bestpractice is
required.
Two
approaches
are
available: national incentives
to
adopt
standard content goals combined with more appropriate
assessmentof
progress,andnetwork-based distributionofquality-assured
materials,
methods, and services.
Targeted
effortsto
improve
ruraland
urbanschoolsarguably
the greatest challenge to
reform are
vital. Access to information and
assistanceinadoptingthebest practicesandmaterialsinthese
schools
22
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
25/80
should be thefirst priority. Parental involvem ent must be
encouraged
through all possible means to keep education high on the
family
agenda evenwhenchildren are not at school. M echanism s for
aiding
parental involvement
and for
providing special help, particularly
fo r
single-parent families
and families in
pover ty , m ust
be
instituted.
Specific reformsmustalso addresswhatgoes
on
inside
the
classroom, especially with regard
to
science
andmathemat-
ics. Changes in structure and organ ization, im portant as they
are, will
not be enough. Educat ion reform must be top-down, bot tom
-up,
inside-out , and outside-in.
21
Refo rm ed schools* will have the same
parents,
th e
same students,
and
m u c h
the
same educational process,
untilthose schoolsadop t co ntent standards fo r wha t students
sho uld
k no w, and
until
that content isembodied in new curr icula taughtby
better- trained teachers and measured by better assessment
methods.
Special
Problems of
Math
and
Science ducation
There
is
little dispute that
a
numbe r
of
outstanding prob-
lems specific to math and science education remain to be
addressed:
Rote learninginm athem aticsandscience, aggrav atedby the
emphasis o nstandardizedtesting, leavesstudents without the
capacity to think quantitatively and
solve
problems fo r
themselves.
Eveninschools tha t offer science courses,thesequential
nature
of
courses
in different
science subjects deprives students
of
the opportunity for integrated learning.
The
rapid obsolescence
of
scientific knowledge necessi-
tates
an
approach
to
teacher training that
is
different from
that for most other subjects.
Declining m ino rity representation (relativeto the mix of
students) is a particularly serious problem am ong m ath and
science teachers and other professionals in technical
fields.
* New Am erican Schools are envisioned in
America 2000.
These schools, initially one ineach
congressional
district,are
designed
by
each
community with one-time federal review andstart-
up support to adopt and reach the Nat ional Educa tion
Goals.
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
26/80
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
27/80
poverty, race,
or
language
in
urban
and
rural
schoolsare not
needed
to
support the
technical base
in
this country. Students
in
poverty
comprise nearly
25
percent
of our
student
base
and
thus
25
percent
of
our potential technical expertise. Because their school systems
cannot
attract
the
best teachers
or
supply
the
latest teaching materials
and
environments,
poor
urban andruralstudents are shortchanged in their
education.
The
benefits
to our
society
of
liftingthesestudents
out of
povertycan beimmense. TheresultsofHead Startandotherprograms
have already shown this
to be
true. From
a
purely economic
perspective, educationcan shift agrowingfraction of the
population
from
a
sink forpublic expenditure
to a
source
of
national wealth.
Anotherexcuseforaccepting studentfailuretomaster workin
science
and
mathematics
is the
fallacy that
these
subjects
are
only
important
for
the
immediately
college
bound.TheSecretary's Commis-
siononAchieving NecessarySkills(SCANS)in
theDepartmentofLabor
is
addressing what high school graduates
needto
know
and
know
how
to do in thejobsoftomorrow. SCANS*isanalyzingtheneedforboth
foundation skills, e.g. literacyand numeracy,and functional
skills,
which are heavily technical and include complex problem
analysis,
understandingofproduction systems, etc.Astrong
focusonpreparing
students for real jobs and
facilitating
the school-to-work transition
should drive K-12 education goals and iscriticallyneeded for
the
revitalizationof the
U.S. economy.
N A T I O N A L
W I L L
A N D
N A T I O N A L S C O P E
The U . S . cansucceedateducatingandpreparingourcitizens
when there
is the
national
will
and the
leadership
to do so.
In an age
when national security is defined by economic strength and
environ-
mentalprotection
as
much
as by
militaryreadiness,
a
well-educated
and
well-trained work force
is
more essential than ever. Therefore,
Americamust mount a national offensive ineducationwith the
same
bold leadership, commitment,
and
professionalism that
it
devotes
to
national defense. However, the taskofeducational reform will
be
much
more
difficult to
achieve than
a
quick
and
decisive military
victory,
even
if
substantial
new
resources were available.
The
goals
of
education are more diffuse, the problems are systemic, and
the
education structure is highly decentralized and adapted to
local
needs
* See Glossary of Acronyms for acomplete listof acronyms used in
the text.
25
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
28/80
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
29/80
Buildaninformed,
broadly
p articipatory, andproductive
collaboration
among
leaders
ofstatesand communities,
federal
agencies and Congress,private institutions, and the
technicalcommunity,
using
a
variety
of new
institutional
mechanisms to ensure that federal activities are both
effective
and supportive.
Thegoal is afederal structurefo rmathandscience education
that
will survive changes in political climate and enable government
to
be a
more
effective
partner
in
this national endeavor than
it hasbeen
in
the
past.
7
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
30/80
PART
IV
F E D E R A L A C T I V I T I E S I N M A T H A N D S C I E N C
E
E D U C A T I O N
This sectiondescribeswhatthefederal governmentisdoingin
mathand
science
educationandwhat moreitcouldbedoing, through
which agencies, andwith what resources.
C U R R E N T S T R A T E G I E S
The Administration has put forward two strategic plans for
its
roleineducation reform.BytheYear2000:
Firstin theWorld,
prepared
by the Committee on Education and Human Resources(CEHR)of
the
Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and
Technol-
ogy
(FCCSET),
describes
an
effort
by sixteen agencies and three
Executive
o ffices
to support math and science education at all levels.
Itwas
released
in
February 1991
as an official
part
of the
President's
budget, and requests an increase of $146 million for
pre-college
education activities. At the pre-college level, the report
emphasizes
teacher preparation, curriculumandmaterials development,
organiza-
tional reform,
and student opportunities. The report is particularly
important
in
view
of the
absence
of
close
collaboration
among many
ofthese agencies in the past, especially between the National
Science
Foundation (NSF)
and the
Department
of
Education (DoEd), which
together control 86 percent of the federal investment in
pre-college
math
and science improvement.
America 2000:
An
EducationStrategy,a
report released
by the
President and the Department ofEducation in April 1991,
callsfor
systemic change in pre-college education. It promises that
the
Administrationwill reward progress and spur change ; a $690
million
increment in the Department of EducationFY1992budget is
requested
tofundits
initiation.
Muchof the
reform strategy described
inAmerica
2000is
based
on
empirical trials
of new
school concepts
and
ways
to
expand parental choice. Dealing with
K-12schoolsas a
whole,
itdoes
not focus
sp ecifically
on mathematics and science. Indeed, the
FCCSET
report, released
two
months earlier,
is not
mentioned.
TheAmerica 2000
strategy
isbottom-up
(i.e., decentralized,
originating locally)
and
outside-in (i.e., initiated
by
non-school orga-
8
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
31/80
nizations). TheBy the Year2000strategy istop-down (createdat
the
stateor national level) and inside-out (created by teachers,
students,
administrators, or parents). Whatever the comprehensive
program
eventually agreed upon by Congress and the Adminis t ra t ion ,
we
believe that
all
fourdirections
of
strategy must
be
used
in
concert
if the
nation is to reform itsschools successfully.
THE MAJOR
F E D E R A L P L A Y E R S
Two
agencies
of the
federalgovernment share
pr imary
respon-
sibilityforprogramsin
K-12
education: the Nat ionalScience Founda-
tion and the Department of Education. NSF is the agency most
specificallyconcerned with improving K-12 math
and
science educa-
tion,and is best prepared today to mobilize the nation's best
talent in
this endeavor. DoEd is responsible for K-12 education across
all
disciplines,isexperienced in the conflictsand
complexitiesofeduca-
t ional politics
and in
addressing systemic problems that afflict
all
elementsofschooling,and has thenetworksinplaceformore
effective
diffusion ofinnovations.
NSF accesses the best research capabilities in the nat ion ,
includingcognitive scienceandlearning research thatshould
inform
strategies fo reducational improvement. It isexperienced
inrunning
competitive programs to support the best ideas arising outside
the
The National Science Foundation
The primary mission of the National Science Foundation is
the support of the nation's professional scientific and
techno-
logical capabilities, through support for basic research. Out
of
NSF's $2.4 billion budget requestfor FY1991,81percentis for
scientific research, mostly at universities. But Congress
also
assigned to NSF responsibility for improving science, math-
ematics,
and
engineering education
at all
levels.
For
this
activity,
conducted in the Directorate for Education and Human
Services,
2 5 1
millionwasrequestedin FY1991,ofwhich66percentwas
forK-12 education.
Today, the pre-college
program
is
receiving
increasing attention as concerns about the impact of poor
schooling
on the
nation's technical excellence
grow.
26
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
32/80
government
and has an
excellent reputation
for
integrity, technical
sophistication,
and the use ofpeer
judgment
in
program selection.
The
research,
universities, which have
the
most
to offer to f u tu r e science
teachers,
areNSF 's
constituency. NSF
has the
capability
todevelopand
test educational materials, methods,
and
tools
for
assessment,
and to
create institutional innovations. However,
because of its modest
budget
and its
competingscience
research
mission,
NSFalonecannot
carry the federal role in math and
science
education reform.
The Department of Education's active participation in math
and
science
education reform is essential,
because
progressin mathematics
and
science
will be made only by literate, numerate students in
fully
functioningschools
throughout
the
nation. Even
if thenation'sneed
fo r
professional scientists
andengineerswereto be fullymet bythose
TheDepartment of ducation
The Department of Education has alonghistory. In 1867 a
non-cabinet-level education department (soon calledanOffice
ofEducation)wasformed,and wasassociated withavarietyof
federal
agencies. Beginning
in the
1960s,
the federal
education
responsibility
was
sited
in the
Office
of
Education
in the
Department
of
Health, Education,
and Welfare
(HEW). This
office was
given Department status
by
Congress
in
1979, when
HEWwas
divided
intothe
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
and
DoEd. DoEd strongly
emphasizes
providing equitable
educational opportunity
for
all, including
the
poor,
the
handicapped,
and the
learning-impaired. Servingdisadvantaged
students more
effectively
calls
for
reform
and
innovations which
arenot
necessarily
the
same initiatives needed
to
address math
and
science educational issues.
ThemajorK-12
spending programs
of the
Department
of
Education were devised primarily
to
reduce
thewithin-districtinequities of state and local spending on
schools
and students, and to help specific groups of students with
special
needs that
are
poorly
met by the
schools. These include programs
of the
Orifice
of
Elementary
andSecondary Education ($7.8 billion
inFY
1991 outlays), Special Education
and
Rehabilitation
Services
($4.4billion),
and
Bilingual Education ($193 million).
Themajor
programsin
these
officesare
Chapter
1
programs
for
disadvantaged
schools
and
students;
the
Education
for All
Handicapped Children
Act
(P.L.
94-142);
and
bilingual education grants
to
school districts
(ESEA,
Title VII,
Part
A).
27
Few ofDoEd's programsaresubject-
specific,
and its
statutes place some constraints
on its
role
in
curriculum
development
and
other activities pivotal
to
education
improvement.
30
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
33/80
schoolsof
superior
qualityand by theimmigrationofforeign scientists,
both equality of opportunity and the quest for the best talent
demand
that special attention
be
given
to
young women, minorities,
and the
poor.
The
scale
of the
equity
effort
required
is far
beyond
NSF's
capability,andDoEd must assist through its
efforts
toleverage state
action. But
DoEd will need
the
collaboration
of N S F ,
particularly
fo r
those activities that must draw on the talents ofscience, math,
and
engineering professionals, such
as
research-based development
of
innovative
materials,
cu rricula,
andmethodsfo rteacher preparationin
mathematics
and science.
NSFandDoEdeachhas
statutory
responsibilityforfed-
eral
efforts
supportingthereformof math andscience
educa-
tion. Redundancy
is not a problem;
these
are
very
different
agencies
and
their
responsibilities
are complementary. The
resources,
skills, and
cultures
of
both agencies
are required if
rapid progress is to bemade towardthe
nationalgoals
for
mathematicsand
science.
Some fourteen other agencies,
of
which
the
Departments
of
Health and
Human Services (HHS), Labor (DoL), Energy (DoE),
Defense (DoD),
and the
National Aeronautics
and
Space Administra-
tion (NASA) are
particularly important,
are in a
position
to
make
significant
contributions
tothese
goals.
The
Secretary
of
Energy
has
a key
role
as
chairman
of
CEHR,which coordinates
the efforts of the
m any
agencies involved.
However,
in
terms
of
dollar investments,
NSF and
DoEd
are the
major
players in
pre-college
matha ndscience education. Theother
agencies together account
fo r
only
14
percent
of the
total federal
investment in
activities directly related
to
K-12 math
and
science
education.
28
M O N E Y
M A T T E R S :
F E D E R A L
S P E N D I N G F O R R E F O R M A N D
I M P R O V E M E N T
Within the
federal government,
NSF and
DoEd have
the
primary federalmission responsibility and budget
authorization
fo r
mathandscience
education (see boxes
for
details).
According to the
recent inventory
by the FCCSET
Committee
onEducationandHuman Resources,all
agencies together spent
only
$515
million
spe cifically
fo r
pre-college math
and
science
in
1991,
$406
million
of that being
directed
at
formal,in-classroom activity.
29
W hy
is itthatthe federalgovernment directstheequivalentof
only 4 percent of its total
K-12
public school
expenditures
30
to the one
31
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
34/80
area of
schoolingscience
and mathematicsin which American
students are intended by the President and governors tobecome
first
in theworld ?
Thereis astrong caseforpriority attentionand
fund ing
by the
federalgovernment specifically
for
math
and
science education:
Quantitative problem solving, reasoning, andbasicscien-
tific
understanding are, along with literacy, essential skills
fo r
protecting
the
United States' comparative advantage
in
the
increasingly information-intensive world economy.
From a trade perspective, this
is
a legitimate and
ma jo r
federal concern.
Federal agencies finance almosthalf
the
nation's research
anddevelopment ($64 billionout of$145.5 billionin1990),
and
federal investments
in
science
and
engineering make
critical
contributions
to
industrial competitiveness
and
hence to economic well-being.
31
Shortcomings in K-12
math and science education may put federal missions, the
economy, and other national interests dependent on
science, mathematics,
and
engineering professionals
at
risk.
Federal xpenditures
forK 12
Math
and
Science
ducation
NSF's total
FY
1991 budget outlaysare estimated at $2.4
billion,with $213 million
(9
percent) going
to
K-12 education.
Virtually
all of
this
is
directed toward math
and
science education.
DoEd'stotalFY1991 budget outlaysareestimated at$24.8
billion, with $7.8 billion
(31
percent) going
to
K-12 education,
most of which is devoted to categorical programsthatallocate
fundsto states and school districts on the basis of
fixed
formulae.
DoEd invests only $228 million,
or
less than
1
percent
of its
total
budget and less than 4 percent of its K-12 budget, on
pre-college
math and scienceeducation.
32
Almost all of this is Eisenhower
Program funds. This investment
is
only slightly more than NSF's,
even though DoEd's total budget is ten times thatof NSF.
The rest of the agencies combined devote far less
money-
only$74
m illion to
pre-college math and science education than
either
NSF or
DoEd.
32
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
35/80
Support for
pre-college
math, science, and
engineering
education
has
been
a
statutory responsibility
of the Na-
t ional
Science Foundation since 1950.
Federal agencies, especiallyNSF,have excellent accessto
university
resources that are essential not only for educa-
tional research
but for
educating young people
for
both
teaching and research.
Successful
teaching
of
mathematics
and
science
isspecifi-
cally
dependent on subject-matter competence, and an
unacceptably large proportion of teachers in the schools
do notpossesstherequisite background.
Thefederal
science agencies
inFCCSET
(which operate
or
finance
over
750
laboratories with over
a
hundred thou-
sand scientists and engineers) have that subject-matter
competence, have been encouraged
to
include education
intheir responsibilities, and have the capability to make a
muchbigger contribution than they do today.
There
is
less political controversy over
the
content
of
math
and sciencecurriculathan in other areas, such as ethnocen-
tric
and multilingual teaching, and therefore less ideologi-
cal objection
to
federal participation
in
reform
of
math-
ematics
and
science (with
the
lingering controversy about
evolution vs. creationism an important exception).
The
President indicated
his
priorities
by
giving math
and
science education priority attention
in the FY
1992 budget
request
(a 28
percent increase).
The Task Forceconcludesthat4percentof the total
federal
pre-college educational
investment,
which
itself
is
only
6
percent
oftotal public
school
revenues, is an inadequate
reflection of thepriority accordedtomathand
science
educa-
tion hi the national goals.
But
would increasing expenditures
in the
current programs
of
the Department of Education solve the math and science
education
problem?
There is no question that substantial expenditures are
necessary
to
redress
the
crippling societal problems that impede
or
prevent the schools
from
being more
effective,
such as poverty, crime,
and parental neglect. Although education will not eliminate
these
conditions, it is a critical tool for helping young
people escape
them.
Therefore it is especially urgent that educational opportunities
in low-
income areas
be
rapidly improved.
More
fundingcould
speedthe reform effortin the
entire cur-
33
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
36/80
riculum, including science and mathematics. The FY
1992budget
requests an additional $690 million to support the America
2000
strategy,overandaboveexisting
funds
in theDepartmentofEducation
and other agencies. For mathematics and science in particular,
the
FCCSET budget requests anadditional
$146
million above last year's
$514
million,
to a
total
of
$660 million. Together, these increases
amount to$836million in new
funding
forschoolreform. (With the
additional $150-200millionrequested f rom the business
community
fo rthe
America2000
project, this amounts to about $1 billion in new
f u nd ing forfederal initiativesineducation reform.)
Many believe that
far
more should
be
appropriated
for
improving
the
schools. Most immediately important, however,
is how
f u nd ing willbeused,and howwelltheagencies areprepared to
use
it .
The right question, then, is: Does the federal government have,
or
can it
acquire,
a
unique
and effective
capability, working with
the
states, to achieve the national educational goals intime?
With
federal contributions unlikely to increase dramatically
under
present fiscal
conditions,
thefederal government's rolein
reform
should
be to
leverage state
and
private investments
and
producechangein thesystem,not tosustainit as it is. But
real
change, brought to every state and every community, cannot
be
achieved by subsidies for the existing system nor by
exhortation. Real
change requires responding boldly to original ideas from inside
and
outside
the
educational community, assessing them
for effectiveness,
and
institutionalizing
them throughout the country when they are
successful. The
role
of the
federal government, then,
is not a
passive
one,
but isboth
empowering
of and
responsive
to
ideas from within
schoolsand fromoutsidetheeducational systemon howschools,and
the condition of children ill-prepared to come to school, can
be
improved.
Federal
K 12 ducation xpenditures
Pre-college
education is the only education most Americans
will
experience and is the onlyformaleducation common toall.
Since
1920, the financial contribution of the
federal
government
to
total pre-college education revenues
has
been small compared
to state and local expenditures. In 1980 the
federal
share of total
public school education revenues peaked at 10 percent. Since
then
it has
declined gradually
and
today
it
stands
at
about
6
percent.
33
The bulk
(over
$200 billion) isfunded bystate (50
percent) and local (44 percent) contributions.
34
The federal
government is not the financial
heavy
weight in the
K-12
education arena.
34
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
37/80
Asu bstantial reorientation
of
education funding toward edu-
cationalreform
is
neededquickly.
The
states
are
occasionally able
to
assem ble m oneys to
finance
a program to up grade the public schools
or im prove instruction. When they are, the amounts are
generally
minusculein relation to school op erating costs. Inev itably,
when the
local
economy turns down,fixedcosts consu m e whatev er latitude
has
been
assembled. I f only 10percentof theD oEd's$ 7.8b
illionannual
elementary and secondary
education expenditure
were
appropriated
for
funding
incentives for improv ement in allaspects of the
education
system,this,added
to
NSF
funding, would
produce
overa
billion
dollars
for
reform. Even when spread across m uchof the country, such an
amountwould represent auniqu e resource fo rplanningandleverag
-
ing
change
at the
level
of a
state,city,
or
comm unity .
How
much flexibility
in
funding
fo r
reform
is
currently
availableto the federal agencies? It isdifficult topulloutwhich
parts
ofthe billions spent by the federal go vern m ent on K -12
education are
forchange,but webelievethefraction ism u chto
osmall.TheFCCSET
survey suggests that resource allocation priorities
are not
oriented
toward the plann ing and im plementation of systemic change.
The
FCCSET
agencies together
are
investing only
11
percent
of the
federal
spending in pre-college math and science
education
on systemic
change, evaluation and assessment, and
diffusion
of innovations.
35
Thus
the
flexible
fundsav ailablefo rthese v ital
functions,
whichare not
supported by state and local
funding,
are less than 1 percent of the
annual federal K-12 budget.
T he
governm ent should consider that,
because
theydraw upon
the
trained m ath
and sciencepersonnel
o f
the
nation, federal agencies should earmark some percentage
of
their
research
and development
funding
for
math
and
science educa tion.
Thiswould significantly improvethe directed funding fo
renhancing
them athandscience pipeline. Ifthepercentage wereset at
10percent
of
R&D funding,
fo r
exam ple, an other $4.8 billion w ou ld
be
generated
for
math
andscienceeducation.
36
R E S O U R C E S F O R M A T H A N D S C I E N C E I M P R O V
E M E N T
Howmighta
federal
strategyforgeneral education reform be
strengthened? In order to recruit the best ideas from the
best
innovators,
the
DoEdneedsm ore fund ing flexibility.
The
TaskForce
recommends
that,as a
long-termgoal,
a
designated
fraction
(perhaps10percent)ofDoEd's
program
funding beallocatedfordiscretionaryactivities aimed at more
effective
achievementof its program
goals.
Theseactivities w ou ld
35
-
8/10/2019 k 12 Education 0991
38/80
be
devoted
tochange-oriented, competitive, professionally reviewed
programs thatprovideincentives
for
ref
