College Park -- With dire economic news dominating the presidential race and many of the 470 Congressional contests, discussions about the U.S. education system, particularly how children learn science and mathematics, have faded into the background. Yet the major challenges of the K-12 education system - challenges that many experts consider critical to the future economic well-being of the country - await the next president and Congress.
Regardless of whether the next president is Barack Obama or John McCain, or which party controls Congress, the most contentious education issue will undoubtedly be the fate of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The law is reviled by some, and seen as a significant step forward by others.
In fact, NCLB, passed by Congress in 2001, was a bipartisan effort to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The main goals of NCLB--to improve math and reading competency, make schools accountable for poor student performance, and give parents the opportunity to move their children to better performing schools--are generally lauded. But some parents and teachers have made policymakers aware of their objections to the way NCLB works.
Perhaps the most controversial component of NCLB is the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) measure that requires schools to reach 100 percent proficiency in math and reading by 2014. Schools must demonstrate progress in their progress measure every year, and those that fail to demonstrate progress for consecutive years are labeled as “in need of improvement” and face penalties including student transfers and intervention by a state’s department of education.
Only reading and math scores count towards the progress measure, science scores do not. As a result, many in the science community feel that their content is undermined as schools teach to the test, focusing class time and resources on math and reading.
Patti Curtis, managing director of the Washington office of Boston’s Museum of Science, said the first thing legislators are likely to do is change the name of NCLB to try to free it from its controversial past. According to Curtis, the changes won’t stop there. Legislators may “soften the implications for testing,” by allowing “multiple measures,” like graduation rates, to contribute towards yearly progress.
But Curtis warns that the “fuzzier we get, the easier it is to sweep the bad news [about student progress] under the rug.” Curtis says that if the testing component of NCLB is radically changed, “we’re not comparing apples to apples anymore.”
As far as whether an Obama or McCain presidency would be easier to work with on NCLB, Curtis says that both camps “have their hearts in the right place,” but whoever wins will “face a horrible economy” that will take priority over other issues. The economy, Curtis said, is going to have to be “the number one fix” of the next administration.
Presidential Visions
Obama and McCain have released position papers outlining their visions for education reform. Obama has offered a plan for billions of dollars in new education expenditures, while McCain has been more conservative. McCain has said repeatedly that he favors a one-year freeze on discretionary spending so he could assess federal programs and cut those that do not show meaningful results. McCain, like Obama, has also said that he will fully fund the America COMPETES Act, which among other initiatives provides funding for various science and math education programs.
In a November, 2007 speech, Obama discussed the important role of science and math education. Calling education “the currency of the information age,” Obama called for a retooling of NCLB and incentives to recruit and retain science specific teachers. Obama’s education platform includes support for charter schools that would focus on math and science programs, stricter teacher development and responsibility measures, and a reemphasis of science and math subjects across the public education system.
Among the most consistently cited challenges facing science and math education are the number and quality of teachers. The National Science Board’s Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 report noted that 80 percent of schools had teaching vacancies last year, with 74 percent having vacancies in math programs and 56 percent having openings in physical science departments.
Obama’s education agenda includes discretionary expenditures that would influence the number of teachers in science and math. Obama has proposed Teaching Service Scholarships that cover training costs in teacher preparation and, through alternative certification programs, encourage those with training in physics and mathematics to become teachers. Funds would be made available at either the undergraduate or graduate level at a maximum of $25,000 a year and grant recipients would be required to teach in high-need fields, like science and math, or high-need locations for four years.
McCain called education “the civil rights issue of this century” in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, and went on to add that students at underperforming schools should have a choice to attend another school.
McCain’s platform on education is devoted to giving primary and secondary school students the opportunity to transfer among public, private, and charter schools. McCain supports transferring federal monies from schools that students transfer out of to their new places of learning. Ostensibly that would apply to science and math specific charter schools. He also supports alternative certification programs to increase the teaching workforce, and bonuses for high performing teachers who cover science and math subjects.
Economic Concerns
A 2005 report from the National Academy of Sciences showed that science and math education is particularly important to the nation’s economic future. “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” revealed the nation’s sinking science education status, observing that “for the first time in generations, the nation’s children could face poorer prospects than their parents and grandparents did.”
Despite the best intentions of both McCain and Obama, the economic challenges facing the next administration and Congress - recession, ballooning national debt, and continuing war funding - could limit any in-depth attempts to reform the education system for science.
“I think it’s going to be tough whoever is President” says Sam Rankin, associate executive director of the American Mathematical Society, and director of the AMS Washington office. Funding for the National Science Foundation, which funds a number of science and math education programs nationwide, has not kept up with inflation. Rankin argues that “from a science point of view, we’ve been on this [spending] freeze for two years.”
Given the current economic crisis, that freeze may continue, experts fear.
