In 1983 the secretary of education under President Reagan released a report entitled, “A Nation at Risk.” A famous line from that report conjectured that if a foreign nation had imposed upon us this mediocre system of schooling, the U.S. would consider it an act of war. At that time, the major threat was the Soviet Union on the security front and Japan on the economic front. Japanese companies had surged in the late seventies in technology and manufacturing. Calling for raising academic standards, A Nation at Risk became the genesis of the standards-based movement that emerged in the early 1990’s and has made the No Child Left Behind legislation possible. Every state but Iowa has established state standards and has a state testing system. In addition to raising academic standards, the report also called for strengthening the graduation requirements in core topic areas: language arts, math, and science.
Two decades later, terrorism has replaced the Soviet Union as the primary security threat and globalization, particularly outsourcing and the “China Price,” have replaced Japan as the primary economic threat. The solution remains the same. The Wall Street Journal reported today on a stiffening of high school graduation requirements across several states. A major proponent of this movement is Achieve, Inc., a business-backed educational policy nonprofit. Board members include the likes of former IBM CEO Lou Gerstner and former Intel CEO Craig Barret.
While A Nation at Risk spurred a strengthening of at least rudimentary graduation requirements in math and science, the article highlights efforts in a number of states seeking to increase the number of math and science courses needed for graduation. The goal is to move beyond rudimentary requirements to requiring all students to successfully complete a college prep sequence of math and science. According to Becoming Adult a study by Csikszentmihalyi and Schneider, the most important factor influencing whether a high school student attends a four-year college is successful completion of high-level math and science courses. Requiring students to take higher-level math and science courses will maximize opportunities for graduating high school students.
However, the article cites that such moves will increase the cost of doing business. In many cases it will require hiring more math and science teachers at a time when qualified math and science teachers are already in high demand. In addition, to accommodate more science courses will require constructing more lab-equipped classrooms. Texas estimates it will cost $200 million to equip enough classrooms to accommodate an increase of 200,000 students taking additional science courses.
Toshmo, R. (2005, March 29). “Diploma bar is getting higher at many U.S. high schools,” Wall Street Journal, B1, B4.
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Fewer Engineering Offspring
From 1975 to 2000, the U.S. dropped from 3rd to 17th worldwide rank in the number of engineers it produces. The Wall Street Journal reports continuous concern over this decrease in engineers. A number of tech executives warn that this trend will have a significant impact on the United States’ long-term competitiveness. In an interesting ironic twist, these same engineering executives report that they are having a hard time interesting their own children to pursue careers in engineering. The offspring cite several reasons for their lack of interest. First is a fear that there will not be engineering opportunities in the U.S. since engineering jobs are being outsourced to India. A second reason is a lack of interest based on their experiences in school. About 120,000 students start off in engineering. However, only about half graduate. The article also cites poor math and science curricula as well as persistent image problems. Engineers are often thought of as socially awkward or obsessed with work.
It is interesting to note that in a study by Csikszentmihalyi and Schneider called Becoming Adult, engineering was in the top 10 careers that middle and high school students thought they would pursue after college. Why is there such a big gap between interest at the middle school level and graduation of engineers from college? I personally do not buy the argument that it is simply a factor of poor public education. The 120,000 freshman who start out in engineering are an elite class. To make it into an engineering program, these students made it through an advanced sequence of math and science courses in high school and have scored well on their SAT’s. The offspring highlighted in the article did not cite lack of ability as the reason for leaving, but rather lack of interest. It seems like programs aimed at retaining students in engineering programs would have more bang for the buck. A one hundred percent retention rate would double the number of engineering graduates and vault the U.S. back to the top of the world rank.
Grimes, A. (2005, March 29). “Even tech execs can’t get kids to be engineers,” Wall Street Journal, B1, B6.
It is interesting to note that in a study by Csikszentmihalyi and Schneider called Becoming Adult, engineering was in the top 10 careers that middle and high school students thought they would pursue after college. Why is there such a big gap between interest at the middle school level and graduation of engineers from college? I personally do not buy the argument that it is simply a factor of poor public education. The 120,000 freshman who start out in engineering are an elite class. To make it into an engineering program, these students made it through an advanced sequence of math and science courses in high school and have scored well on their SAT’s. The offspring highlighted in the article did not cite lack of ability as the reason for leaving, but rather lack of interest. It seems like programs aimed at retaining students in engineering programs would have more bang for the buck. A one hundred percent retention rate would double the number of engineering graduates and vault the U.S. back to the top of the world rank.
Grimes, A. (2005, March 29). “Even tech execs can’t get kids to be engineers,” Wall Street Journal, B1, B6.
Monday, March 28, 2005
Bill Gates’ Think Week
When I graduated from Northwestern University with a B.S. in education and computer programming, I was invited to interview with Microsoft in Redmond, WA. I interviewed with members of the MS Word and Encarta development teams. Each of the developers that interviewed me posed interesting programming challenges and asked me to sketch proposed algorithms on white boards in their office. During the course of each interview I also mentioned that my long-term interest was developing educational software and perhaps Microsoft would be interested in that market. Finally, one of the programmers told me that Bill Gates is not interested in educational software. I ended up not getting a job at Microsoft.
I have no idea whether that programmer is still at Microsoft, but how times have changed. The Wall Street Journal was invited to visit with Bill Gates on one of his twice-annual Think Weeks. Gates secludes himself in an undisclosed retreat location for one week to focus on the future directions of technology and Microsoft’s strategic positioning. In his most recent Think Week, Gates read roughly 100 papers in eight topic areas. One of those topic areas was education. Gates read a paper by Craig Bartholomew, the general manager of the education group, in which Bartholomew discusses recommendations for how Microsoft’s core products can better address the education market. Apparently, the paper was well received and Bartholomew reports that, “People in my group are optimistic now.”
Given Gates’ active interest in education policy both through the Gates Foundation and through his public comments about the state of education (e.g. National Governors summit on high school reform), it is clear that Gates has taken a keen interest in improving education. It will be interesting to see what Microsoft’s education technology strategy will be.
Guth, R. A. (2005, March 28). “In secret hideaway, Bill Gates ponders Microsoft’s future,” Wall Street Journal, A1.
I have no idea whether that programmer is still at Microsoft, but how times have changed. The Wall Street Journal was invited to visit with Bill Gates on one of his twice-annual Think Weeks. Gates secludes himself in an undisclosed retreat location for one week to focus on the future directions of technology and Microsoft’s strategic positioning. In his most recent Think Week, Gates read roughly 100 papers in eight topic areas. One of those topic areas was education. Gates read a paper by Craig Bartholomew, the general manager of the education group, in which Bartholomew discusses recommendations for how Microsoft’s core products can better address the education market. Apparently, the paper was well received and Bartholomew reports that, “People in my group are optimistic now.”
Given Gates’ active interest in education policy both through the Gates Foundation and through his public comments about the state of education (e.g. National Governors summit on high school reform), it is clear that Gates has taken a keen interest in improving education. It will be interesting to see what Microsoft’s education technology strategy will be.
Guth, R. A. (2005, March 28). “In secret hideaway, Bill Gates ponders Microsoft’s future,” Wall Street Journal, A1.
Thursday, February 10, 2005
Funding Inspiration Research
One of the most fundamental aspects of implementing an agenda that looks at how inspiration happens is funding. It is my belief that inspiration develops over a much longer period of time than the typical 3-5 year cycle of grants. Below is a 3-year old story that seems like it might have been written yesterday. While it discusses the Dept of Labor, it is typical of all the federal agencies. In today's funding climate in Congress, it seems even harder for an agency to fulfill its mission when Congress arbitrarily adds funds to their budget. If the agency lacks consistency, how can a sustained agenda be developed when political winds can easily be changed every 2 years?
----------------------------------------------------------
We'll earmark funds if we feel like it, appropriations chair tells OMB
By Julie Rovner, CongressDaily
Feb 7, 2002
House Appropriations Chairman Bill Young, R-Fla., escalated a war of words with the Bush administration Wednesday over a sticky and territorial issue in budget diplomacy: earmarks in the Labor-HHS spending bill.
The administration has proposed eliminating funding for some of the 690 projects in the fiscal 2003 Labor-HHS bill, to make up a $1.3 billion shortfall in the Pell Grant college scholarship program. In a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels, Young threw down the gauntlet, citing chapter and clause of the Constitution.
"This leaves no ambiguity," Young's letter declared. "The power of the purse resides solely with the Congress. Unless the Constitution is amended, Congress will continue to exercise its discretion over federal funds and will earmark those funds for purposes we deem appropriate."
The letter comes in response not just to the Pell Grant problem, but also to comments made earlier this week, when the administration's 2003 budget was released.
The budget document noted, "In 2002, 100 percent of the $312 million appropriated for health facilities construction was earmarked by the Congress, leaving HHS with no discretion in deciding which construction projects would be funded."
The earmarks, including projects for at least 41 states and Puerto Rico, consumed nearly three single-spaced pages in the Congressional Record of Dec. 18.
At his budget briefing Monday, HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson complained for the second year in a row that earmarks steer money away from other needed programs.
But Young said the committee would not back down.
"All wisdom on the allocation of federal grant funding does not reside in the executive branch," he wrote. "Many of these projects are in rural communities or from small community-based organizations that lack the capacity to hire grantwriters and compete with more sophisticated organizations for funding."
Source: http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0202/020702cdam2.htm
----------------------------------------------------------
We'll earmark funds if we feel like it, appropriations chair tells OMB
By Julie Rovner, CongressDaily
Feb 7, 2002
House Appropriations Chairman Bill Young, R-Fla., escalated a war of words with the Bush administration Wednesday over a sticky and territorial issue in budget diplomacy: earmarks in the Labor-HHS spending bill.
The administration has proposed eliminating funding for some of the 690 projects in the fiscal 2003 Labor-HHS bill, to make up a $1.3 billion shortfall in the Pell Grant college scholarship program. In a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels, Young threw down the gauntlet, citing chapter and clause of the Constitution.
"This leaves no ambiguity," Young's letter declared. "The power of the purse resides solely with the Congress. Unless the Constitution is amended, Congress will continue to exercise its discretion over federal funds and will earmark those funds for purposes we deem appropriate."
The letter comes in response not just to the Pell Grant problem, but also to comments made earlier this week, when the administration's 2003 budget was released.
The budget document noted, "In 2002, 100 percent of the $312 million appropriated for health facilities construction was earmarked by the Congress, leaving HHS with no discretion in deciding which construction projects would be funded."
The earmarks, including projects for at least 41 states and Puerto Rico, consumed nearly three single-spaced pages in the Congressional Record of Dec. 18.
At his budget briefing Monday, HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson complained for the second year in a row that earmarks steer money away from other needed programs.
But Young said the committee would not back down.
"All wisdom on the allocation of federal grant funding does not reside in the executive branch," he wrote. "Many of these projects are in rural communities or from small community-based organizations that lack the capacity to hire grantwriters and compete with more sophisticated organizations for funding."
Source: http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0202/020702cdam2.htm
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
Inspiring the Next Generation of Explorers: A White Paper
I have pasted below a white paper that I have started. I attempt to define what it means to inspire in the context of NASA. The thoughts expressed in this draft have been heavily influenced by my interactions with my colleageues, Greg Meier, Brian Curry, and Todd Borghesani.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NASA’s Challenge
“NASA faces significant human capital challenges that threaten the Agency’s ability to accomplish its mission. As a world-class science and engineering agency, NASA must be able to recruit and retain top-quality scientists and engineers to accomplish its core work and remain world-class.” (1)
In a recent report to Congress, NASA outlined a variety of factors contributing to the decline in the science and engineering workforce. The most significant external factor is the decline in the overall number of students graduating in science and engineering. It will be difficult to reverse that trend in the short term given current levels of math and science literacy in the K-12 pipeline. Students are not being prepared to pursue higher-level coursework in math and science. Without that higher-level coursework, students will not have the option to select a science or engineering major at the university level. The most significant internal factor is that as a career option, NASA has lost its luster along with both the aerospace industry and the public service sector as a whole. Those students that do graduate in technical fields are in high demand. Last year, Interbrand published a review of the NASA brand and found it to be struggling for relevancy among the very youth that NASA is attempting to attract into careers at the agency (2). It is incumbent upon NASA to become relevant to today’s youth while at the same time contribute towards improving scientific literacy.
Despite steep budget cuts and years of hiring freezes, NASA has managed to successfully retain the world’s greatest scientific and engineering talent. NASA’s world-class scientists and engineers have created a culture of creative audacity that has kept NASA at the forefront of many disciplines and led to numerous discoveries. Critical to NASA’s success as a highly technical mission agency is the mentoring relationships between experienced and new employees. Through mentoring relationships, new employees not only develop necessary skills, but just as importantly, they assimilate into the NASA culture of success. Unfortunately, NASA’s world-class talent outnumbers new talent by 3 to 1. One-fourth of that talent is eligible to retire in 5 years. It is critical that NASA take a “strategic, proactive, and aggressive approach” to ensure a smooth transition to the new generation of explorers.
NASA’s workforce challenge is similar to that faced by industry in general. Not enough students are graduating from our nation’s schools with adequate preparation for technical careers. One clear indication of this lack of preparation comes from the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which measures science and math achievement at three levels (basic, proficient, and advanced). In the 2000 administration of the science and math NAEP test, over three-fourths of the students failed to score at the proficient level and almost half of our nation’s graduating seniors failed to score at even the basic level of achievement. Without adequate preparation in math and science, students will find it difficult to pursue technical fields of study in college and beyond. Therefore, increasing the pipeline of students entering technical fields is integrally tied to improving scientific literary at the precollege level.
Inspiring the Next Generation of Explorers
NASA has identified the expansion of the pipeline as a significant challenge for the future. To be successful in this endeavor it is imperative to improve scientific literacy at the precollege level. Improving scientific literacy and increasing the number of science and engineering graduates is a long-term challenge. Today’s technically inclined middle schoolers will be graduating from college in a decade and earning a doctorate in a decade and a half. Educational reforms intended to shepherd today’s middle schoolers into science and engineering careers must be sustained across seven congressional elections and four presidential ones. Shifting political winds pose a tremendous threat to developing and sustaining consensus over a long period of time.
As an agency, NASA has achieved tremendous success at maintaining a focused mission in the face of a changing political landscape. NASA’s earliest human space flight programs, Mercury and Apollo, survived two Republican and two Democratic presidencies. The International Space Station has survived one Democratic and three Republican presidencies as well as numerous government changes in Canada, Europe, Russia, and Japan. These are but two examples of the many programs that NASA has sustained over the course of its first four and half decades. During that timeframe, NASA has also had to overcome significant setbacks in both its manned and unmanned missions. In the aftermath of these setbacks, NASA has routinely been barraged with questions from Congress and the general public: “Is the loss of life and the hundreds of millions of dollars worth it?” NASA and their astronauts truly believe it is worth the risk. NASA’s programs have survived because they are able to remind its stakeholders of the importance of the goals as well as the challenge and risk involved in achieving those goals.
NASA’s success in sustaining long-term efforts is based on two important features of the goals that have been adopted. The first feature is that the goals are framed in such a way as to appeal to the general public, politicians and the scientific community. These goals are important, comprehendible, challenging, and achievable. Sending humans to the Moon as well as maintaining a research platform in Earth’s orbit are examples of goals that meet these criteria. The relevant stakeholders can easily see the importance of both goals. To achieve them NASA has had to overcome many challenges along the way. The second feature is that the goals balance science and engineering. In each case, NASA’s goals involve the resolution of fundamental engineering problems. Through the resolution of these problems, NASA contributes to basic science. In addition, the resulting feats of engineering create scientific platforms to explore phenomena in ways never before possible. By appealing to a broad section of the general public and making significant contributions to the scientific community, NASA has established a culture that can maintain momentum through political changes and programmatic setbacks.
NASA is in a unique position to bring its culture to bear on the scientific literacy and pipeline challenges it faces. As with many of its successful long-term endeavors, NASA has framed an overarching education goal that is important, comprehendible, challenging, and achievable: “to inspire the next generation of explorers…as only NASA can.” Many within NASA have misconstrued this inspiration goal as simply making people feel good about what NASA is doing and therefore feel that the goal ignores pipeline and scientific literacy. This view is consistent with a narrow interpretation of the definition for inspire: “to arouse a particular feeling in somebody.” (3) However, it is our belief that fostering individuals to become explorers is consistent with a broader interpretation of the definition for inspire: “to encourage people into greater efforts or greater enthusiasm or creativity.” (3) For NASA inspiration is more than a feeling; it also means spurring individuals into action that leads them to become explorers.
As a goal inspiration provides a powerful framework for addressing NASA’s long-term scientific literacy and pipeline challenges. Inspiration suggests to educators that schools need to go beyond the learning of scientific concepts and skills that are embedded in the national/state standards. School experiences should foster an emotional attachment towards STEM communities. Inspiration suggests to NASA that experiences should be sustained over a long period of time. Experiences with NASA resources can foster positive emotion, but it is the connection with people that brings individuals to the NASA community and increases the pipeline. Thus, under the goal of inspiration, NASA and educators are united in their efforts to foster growth in concepts and skills, growth of individual’s affect towards NASA, and growth of participation within the NASA community.
------------------------------------------------
(1) NASA’S WORKFORCE PLAN for the use of the NASA Flexibility Act of 2004 Authorities.
(2) Interbrand is an international brand consulting firm. Along with BusinessWeek, they annually publish the list of top 100 global brands. See http://www.brandchannel.com/features_profile.asp?prid=114 for the article on the NASA brand.
(3) Encarta World English Dictionary, Microsoft Word 2004 for Mac, Version 11.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NASA’s Challenge
“NASA faces significant human capital challenges that threaten the Agency’s ability to accomplish its mission. As a world-class science and engineering agency, NASA must be able to recruit and retain top-quality scientists and engineers to accomplish its core work and remain world-class.” (1)
In a recent report to Congress, NASA outlined a variety of factors contributing to the decline in the science and engineering workforce. The most significant external factor is the decline in the overall number of students graduating in science and engineering. It will be difficult to reverse that trend in the short term given current levels of math and science literacy in the K-12 pipeline. Students are not being prepared to pursue higher-level coursework in math and science. Without that higher-level coursework, students will not have the option to select a science or engineering major at the university level. The most significant internal factor is that as a career option, NASA has lost its luster along with both the aerospace industry and the public service sector as a whole. Those students that do graduate in technical fields are in high demand. Last year, Interbrand published a review of the NASA brand and found it to be struggling for relevancy among the very youth that NASA is attempting to attract into careers at the agency (2). It is incumbent upon NASA to become relevant to today’s youth while at the same time contribute towards improving scientific literacy.
Despite steep budget cuts and years of hiring freezes, NASA has managed to successfully retain the world’s greatest scientific and engineering talent. NASA’s world-class scientists and engineers have created a culture of creative audacity that has kept NASA at the forefront of many disciplines and led to numerous discoveries. Critical to NASA’s success as a highly technical mission agency is the mentoring relationships between experienced and new employees. Through mentoring relationships, new employees not only develop necessary skills, but just as importantly, they assimilate into the NASA culture of success. Unfortunately, NASA’s world-class talent outnumbers new talent by 3 to 1. One-fourth of that talent is eligible to retire in 5 years. It is critical that NASA take a “strategic, proactive, and aggressive approach” to ensure a smooth transition to the new generation of explorers.
NASA’s workforce challenge is similar to that faced by industry in general. Not enough students are graduating from our nation’s schools with adequate preparation for technical careers. One clear indication of this lack of preparation comes from the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which measures science and math achievement at three levels (basic, proficient, and advanced). In the 2000 administration of the science and math NAEP test, over three-fourths of the students failed to score at the proficient level and almost half of our nation’s graduating seniors failed to score at even the basic level of achievement. Without adequate preparation in math and science, students will find it difficult to pursue technical fields of study in college and beyond. Therefore, increasing the pipeline of students entering technical fields is integrally tied to improving scientific literary at the precollege level.
Inspiring the Next Generation of Explorers
NASA has identified the expansion of the pipeline as a significant challenge for the future. To be successful in this endeavor it is imperative to improve scientific literacy at the precollege level. Improving scientific literacy and increasing the number of science and engineering graduates is a long-term challenge. Today’s technically inclined middle schoolers will be graduating from college in a decade and earning a doctorate in a decade and a half. Educational reforms intended to shepherd today’s middle schoolers into science and engineering careers must be sustained across seven congressional elections and four presidential ones. Shifting political winds pose a tremendous threat to developing and sustaining consensus over a long period of time.
As an agency, NASA has achieved tremendous success at maintaining a focused mission in the face of a changing political landscape. NASA’s earliest human space flight programs, Mercury and Apollo, survived two Republican and two Democratic presidencies. The International Space Station has survived one Democratic and three Republican presidencies as well as numerous government changes in Canada, Europe, Russia, and Japan. These are but two examples of the many programs that NASA has sustained over the course of its first four and half decades. During that timeframe, NASA has also had to overcome significant setbacks in both its manned and unmanned missions. In the aftermath of these setbacks, NASA has routinely been barraged with questions from Congress and the general public: “Is the loss of life and the hundreds of millions of dollars worth it?” NASA and their astronauts truly believe it is worth the risk. NASA’s programs have survived because they are able to remind its stakeholders of the importance of the goals as well as the challenge and risk involved in achieving those goals.
NASA’s success in sustaining long-term efforts is based on two important features of the goals that have been adopted. The first feature is that the goals are framed in such a way as to appeal to the general public, politicians and the scientific community. These goals are important, comprehendible, challenging, and achievable. Sending humans to the Moon as well as maintaining a research platform in Earth’s orbit are examples of goals that meet these criteria. The relevant stakeholders can easily see the importance of both goals. To achieve them NASA has had to overcome many challenges along the way. The second feature is that the goals balance science and engineering. In each case, NASA’s goals involve the resolution of fundamental engineering problems. Through the resolution of these problems, NASA contributes to basic science. In addition, the resulting feats of engineering create scientific platforms to explore phenomena in ways never before possible. By appealing to a broad section of the general public and making significant contributions to the scientific community, NASA has established a culture that can maintain momentum through political changes and programmatic setbacks.
NASA is in a unique position to bring its culture to bear on the scientific literacy and pipeline challenges it faces. As with many of its successful long-term endeavors, NASA has framed an overarching education goal that is important, comprehendible, challenging, and achievable: “to inspire the next generation of explorers…as only NASA can.” Many within NASA have misconstrued this inspiration goal as simply making people feel good about what NASA is doing and therefore feel that the goal ignores pipeline and scientific literacy. This view is consistent with a narrow interpretation of the definition for inspire: “to arouse a particular feeling in somebody.” (3) However, it is our belief that fostering individuals to become explorers is consistent with a broader interpretation of the definition for inspire: “to encourage people into greater efforts or greater enthusiasm or creativity.” (3) For NASA inspiration is more than a feeling; it also means spurring individuals into action that leads them to become explorers.
As a goal inspiration provides a powerful framework for addressing NASA’s long-term scientific literacy and pipeline challenges. Inspiration suggests to educators that schools need to go beyond the learning of scientific concepts and skills that are embedded in the national/state standards. School experiences should foster an emotional attachment towards STEM communities. Inspiration suggests to NASA that experiences should be sustained over a long period of time. Experiences with NASA resources can foster positive emotion, but it is the connection with people that brings individuals to the NASA community and increases the pipeline. Thus, under the goal of inspiration, NASA and educators are united in their efforts to foster growth in concepts and skills, growth of individual’s affect towards NASA, and growth of participation within the NASA community.
------------------------------------------------
(1) NASA’S WORKFORCE PLAN for the use of the NASA Flexibility Act of 2004 Authorities.
(2) Interbrand is an international brand consulting firm. Along with BusinessWeek, they annually publish the list of top 100 global brands. See http://www.brandchannel.com/features_profile.asp?prid=114 for the article on the NASA brand.
(3) Encarta World English Dictionary, Microsoft Word 2004 for Mac, Version 11.1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)