I. Nature and history of problem basic structures and incentives

II. Potential for improvement why there is hope, why hard to reach

II. How DOD might bring about change unique combination of research needs and workforce needs

Creating a more STEM capable DOD workforce

Carl WiemanAssociate Director for ScienceOffice of Science and Technology Policy, EOP

Starting assumption– need more and better technicalcapabilities at all levels.

Troops on the ground ↔ scientists and engineers in labs

How to get there from here?

= expertise in science, technology, engineering, & math

I. The Nature and History of the Problem

stem education is no worse than in the past

• Fraction of 20-24 year olds going into physical sciences and enghad bump after Sputnik. Essentially unchanged last 30 years.

• K-12 Math and science scores, ~flat for as long as have data

How to improve?

Federal Math/Science Education Priority Framework

General Public Science Literacy

1.Public/Community Linked Programs2.Media Dissemination3.Programs for Decision-Makers4.Public Information Campaigns

Strategic Objectives1.Improved Science and Mathematics Performance2.Strong Precollege Teacher Workforce3.Adequate pipeline for the S&T workforces, including increased participation of Underrepresented groups4.Improved Public Science Literacy

Graduate

1.Student Support, Incentives, and Opportunities

Precollege

1.Teacher Preparation and Enhancement2.Curriculum Reform3.Organizational and Systemic Reform4.Student Support, Incentives, and Opportunities

Undergraduate

1.Curriculum Reform2.Faculty Preparation and Enhancement3.Student Support, Incentives, and Opportunities4.Organizational Reform

Implementation Components

•Evaluation and Assessment•Dissemination and Technical Assistance•Educational Technologies

Implementation Priorities

Has been a change!

SMET has becomeSTEM

Solutions that people have been advocating for past 20+ years do not work.

STEMEd

Why not? What to do instead?

K-12school

K-12teacher

prep

Higher ed STEM

teaching

STEM Education System Interconnected pieces (school dominates)

Stability because structure and incentives of each achieves local optimization.

K-12school

K-12teacher

prep

Higher ed STEM

teaching

STEM Education System Interconnected pieces

Stability because structure and incentives of each achieves local optimization. Resilient against localized push

K-12school

K-12teacher

prep

Higher ed STEM

teaching

accountability,incentives,organization—NCLB,Race to Top

effective STEM teachers?

STEM Education System Interconnected pieces

Higher education—K-16 STEM teachers &scientists and engineers

K-12teacher

prep

Higher ed STEM

teaching

STEM in Higher Education

Simplified History:Rise of research university→separation of STEM departments and teacher preparation

STEM departments—optimized to research productivity,graduate training. Department & faculty incentives aligned.

Schools of education— optimized to most students = $$. Incentives aligned.

Disincentives to increase number of undergraduate majors or focus education on workforce needs.

Not involved in teacher training.

Disincentives to change teaching methods.

Lowest math and science requirements.

Faculty with little STEM competence or interest.

Attracts and accommodates most math and science averse students.

Schools of Education Math, Sci. & Eng. Depts

the collateral damage

Institutions (research univ.’s)Administrator focus on research, not learning.

Shift $$ from ed to research.($5000/undergrad per yr AAU. 2/3 to subsidize fed research.)

Each locally optimized,but global result bad.

Expertise and its development

(cog. psych.)

brainresearch

scienceclassroom

studies

Major advances past 1-2 decades Achieving learning of high level expertise

II. Potential for improvement

Results when tested in college STEM courses ( ~1000 papers)•Measure how reason like experts → twice the learning of conventionally taught courses.

•Substantially improved STEM course success rates

•Indicate how to attract and keep more students in STEM. Same ongoing cost→ tremendous opportunity to improve

Results when tested in college STEM courses ( ~1000 papers)•Measure how reason like experts → twice the learning of conventionally taught courses.

•Substantially improved STEM course success rates

•Indicate how to attract and keep more students in STEM.

•Incentives wrong in higher education

•K-12 teachers lack necessary subject expertise --not getting from college STEM courses.

BUT NOT BEING REALIZED

Same cost→ tremendous opportunity

III. How DOD might achieve change

Identified: •Goal-- greater STEM expertise•Potential solution --advances in teaching and learning•Barriers to implementation – metrics & incentive system due to federal R & D funding

STEMEd

Need new incentives --knobs that can turn

But incentives require metrics

Only current metric for research universities:•research output (why divert money from education to research)

To optimize research and workforce training need metrics and incentives for both.

DOD unique agency-- needs both & only lever big enough to move system is research $$$.

Linking R&D funding to education performance(already linked but wrong sign on feedback)

Must directly impact departments and individual faculty

e.g. •Data on departmental STEM teaching practices required for research funding (preference if use best practices & increase STEM grads?)

•Incentives to Schools of Ed & STEM depts to jointly create new teacher preparation programs:

Recruit good STEM studentsSTEM mastery and STEM teaching masteryjoint ed and STEM curriculum and best pedagogyrigorous clinical experience

Not easy things to carry out. But all the easy stuff (“poking the Jello”) has been tried and failed (usually multiple times).

Time to get serious!