On Monday and Tuesday of this week, educators and others with an interest
in K-12 science education gathered to share thoughts on the No Child
Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the Bush Administration's FY 2005 budget request
for science and math education programs, and ways to improve science
instruction. Major topics of concern included the Administration's
proposed phase-out of NSF's Math and Science Partnership program, the
paucity of research into effective science teaching and assessment,
and the impact that the NCLB requirement for science testing, beginning
with the 2007-2008 school year, will have on curricula.
On March 15, at a conference sponsored by the Triangle Coalition,
a panel discussion on the budget request with congressional staffers
revealed a groundswell of support for preserving the Math and Science
Partnerships (MSPs) at NSF. The Administration wants to phase out the
NSF program, and to alter the MSP program at the Education Department
by creating a new competition focused on improving high school math
instruction. Citing the need for a competitive, peer-reviewed program
to develop innovative models that could be replicated in the states,
educator and National Science Board member Jo Anne Vasquez reported
that the Board has sent letters to the President and to Congress, opposing
the elimination of the NSF program. House Science Research Subcommittee
staffer Kara Haas pointed out that the NSF Partnerships were formed
using some pre-existing NSF K-12 funding, and the elimination of the
MSPs would not restore that money, resulting in a "hollowing out" of
K-12 programs at NSF. House Education and the Workforce Committee staffer
Rick Stombres noted that the proposal to enhance the Education Department's
MSP program with grants targeted to high school math improvement would
require a change in the NCLB, and he did not think committee chairman
John Boehner (R-OH) would reopen the bill for amendment. "I don't
see it happening," he said. Stombres also praised the science
and math education community for their efforts to increase funding
for the Education Department MSPs, saying "you are getting the
job done," and "keep up the good work."
The following day, some 700 participants gathered at the Secretary
of Education's Summit on Science to listen to government officials
talk about the importance of science education, and to hear presentations
on science teaching, learning, and assessment. Education Secretary
Rod Paige spoke about the Administration's efforts to ensure that all
children receive a good science education, and acknowledged "the
need for better research into what works." He stated that the
implementation of regular testing in science will help teachers understand
what helps students learn, and will help administrators and policymakers
know "what's working and what's not." OSTP Director John
Marburger eloquently explained that science is more than a list of
vocabulary words or a collection of facts; it is a way of testing ideas
about how nature works. NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe spoke of the
importance of a highly-trained S&T workforce and NASA's efforts
to inspire students to pursue careers in science and engineering. Nobel
Laureate Carl Weiman of the University of Colorado - Boulder remarked
that while Apollo-era efforts to improve science and math education
were targeted at the most promising students, current efforts are focused
on ensuring science literacy for every child. "We're building
something completely new in how we carry out science education," he
said.
Of the many challenges posed by No Child Left Behind, one that was
mentioned repeatedly was the impending requirement for science assessment:
how will it affect curriculum content, and how much is known about
testing students' understanding of science? "What's going to drive
what's taught," stated National Academy of Sciences President
Bruce Alberts, "is what's in the assessments." A number of
panelists noted that tests of higher-order understanding are costlier
to score than multiple-choice, "fill in the bubble" tests.
The Academy is working on a study to help states conduct effective
assessments, Alberts said, but he feared that such assessments would
prove "too expensive."
Enlarge text
Shrink text
Print
E-mail
Digg this
Del.icio.us
Furl