STEM Education continues to emerge as one of the most critical components needed to prepare the next generation of workers for the future. Identifying the fundamental skills that STEM interventions impart, where they should occur, and how they apply to our workforce needs is crucial.
STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) Education references are everywhere: newspapers, blogs, Twitter, speeches, etc. Indeed, it requires little imagination to understand why STEM is important: Innovation in STEM fields has been the primary driver of improvements in quality of life and economic well-being for centuries. To see STEM in action, look no further than your iPhone, running water, or the roads you drive on to work. Today, however, we have a problem: Large sections of our workforce do not have the skills to meet industry demand. Compounding the problem is the fact that our education system, in its current configuration, lacks the assets and will to ameliorate the situation. In economic terms, we are experiencing labor market failure from the supply side. Systemic change across our education system is a mammoth task but one we cannot afford to ignore any longer.
The “STEM is important” discussion needs to evolve to where there is a more comprehensive understanding of this complex problem. Unlike the binary issue of support (or not) for STEM in education, there are many viable approaches for addressing weaknesses in our education system. Moving forward in this policy discussion will require that we take stock of where the most pressing problems lie, and what is being done to resolve them, and verify that we are implementing best practices research to positively impact achievement.
In approaching STEM workforce issues, we need to dig a little deeper than where we are now in the public sphere. We need to get more specific without being overwhelming. While there are a plethora of concerns, there are three that are critical and, if addressed correctly, are potentially transformative for our workforce and, consequently, our future.
First, we need to improve the pedagogical and subject area competence of our STEM teaching corps. Second, we need to integrate the teaching of these subjects and apply them to real world issues so that we leverage the natural bridge between all four fields. Finally, we need to address the disproportionate underrepresentation of women and minorities in STEM fields. If we can bring these issues to the forefront of public discussion and not just those in education, we will have made a good start in elevating the discourse so that we can summon the political will to make the most beneficial choices for our children’s future.
Teaching Teachers to Teach
Improving our teaching corps is critical and challenging and will require policies that address the social and economic constraints of teaching and training in both content and pedagogy. A good starting point for improving the quality of teachers is to address the most obvious deterrent to entering the profession: pay. Even when factoring out professions like law and medicine, the average worker in STEM professions in the U.S. makes between $67,000 and $79,000 annually, whereas the average teacher earns about $56,000 per year. Programs that address this incentive through remission of loans or additional salary will attract the best and brightest to the profession.
Another challenge is training and recruitment. The most recent data available indicates that 69% of students in grades 5-8 are taught math by teachers without math certification. The Carnegie Corporation of New York is the custodian of the 100Kin10 Initiative with more than 100 partners backed by the Obama Administration. Their goal of recruiting 100,000 science teachers in 10 years is ambitious, and there is currently a paucity of programs that instill both professional teaching skills and content knowledge.
One program in the 100Kin10 Initiative that addresses both incentive and training structures is the UTeach Program, a National Math and Science Initiative Program that targets top science and math students in higher education and offers them financial incentives and the ability to graduate with an additional credential in the same amount of time. UTeach has been nationally replicated through the UTeach Institute and in spring of 2012 there were currently 5,538 students enrolled in 29 campuses throughout the US. These efforts are a start, however, they are only as effective as their execution, and we must continue to innovate in our approach to teacher training and content mastery.
STEM Meet STEM and STEM Meet World
Integrating STEM subjects and attaching them to real world problems dovetails with teacher training but expands into the realm of developing benchmarks that drive innovation and encourage connective thought. STEM needs to meet STEM. In other words, the STEM subjects need to interact with each other throughout the educational pipeline to remain relevant and rigorous. Also, STEM subjects need to be applied to real-world problems that are relevant to students’ lives. The National Governors’ Association Center for Best Practices has developed the Common Core State Standards. Key components of these standards include integrating international best practices and skills required in both college and the workforce. In science, the National Research Council’s Next Generation Science standards are similar to the Common Core in that they value integration with other STEM fields, encourage behaviors endemic to the scientific professional community, and foster creative connective thinking. These standards align with internationally accepted best practices and are the result of a national grassroots effort to boost achievement. We need to keep them free from political gamesmanship.
Equity Will Help Fill the Pipeline
Gender and ethnic inequity in STEM fields continues to be a chronic problem. Commerce Department Reports issued last summer found that Blacks and Hispanics comprise only 12% of the STEM workforce, despite representing 25% of the population. Women were similarly underrepresented across STEM fields, where despite representing 48% of the workforce, they comprise only 24% of the STEM workforce. If we are looking for STEM professionals, there is a large degree of untapped potential in these two groups.
There are many interventions that have emerged to address this issue with varied results. The Building Engineering and Science Talent Program (BEST) has led exhaustive evaluations of programs, and the National Science Foundation has several programs aimed at improving participation of Women, Blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics in STEM fields. BEST identifies five principles of good programs: defined outcomes, challenging content, personalization, engaged adults, and persistence. These principles make sense as they correlate with success in most competitive contexts. Programs with a plan, that are challenging, engaging, and led by passionate committed professionals are more likely to succeed. As we evaluate these programs, we need to be careful, however, to set reasonable expectations for results but to push for the desired outcomes.
Where to Next?
Improving STEM skills in education and the workforce has become a rapidly identified national priority. If we are to move forward, however, we must understand where to intervene, what works, and why it is important. These three areas do not operate independently. There is plenty of overlap between all three, and each area will require efficacy in the others’ implementation in order to be successful. They represent, however, a good starting point to move the public discourse on this topic to a point where we collectively can make the best decisions for our children.
2 Responses to Moving a Mountain: STEM Education, from Concept to Reality
Nice post. With the same goal in mind, I would like to share another initiative at the University of Texas-Austin; The Freshman Research initiative (FRI). By getting undergraduates involved in research during their first 2 years in college, FRI has been very successful in improving STEM graduation rate and students’ retention in science especially among underrepresented groups.
http://fri.cns.utexas.edu/
Thank you,
Mr. Wells,I agree with the three important steps you identified; strengthening our teaching core, integrating subject matter and connecting to real world issues and the developing the underrepresented are all extremely important. I cannot agree with you more about the changes that must take place for the good of not only our children’s future, but for our communities, our country, and our world (sorry for the 4-H Pledge reference).Awareness + Acceptance + Action = ChangeTo explore this topic, I have to share the filter that I use. First and foremost I am a father of a wonderful young woman. I also have spent my entire adult career in non-formal education and positive youth development. I conduct parent education, I mentor, and I give back however and wherever I can because I want to give more to the world than I take.Now as I ran your thoughts through my filter and I looked at the STEM education and workforce crisis we are facing, I realize that there is so much more everyone can do to address this issue, this issue of course is a societal issue and everyone must be involved finding the answers. Looking at the equation, there is a great deal of awareness, there is a high level of acceptance, but in order for change to really take place, we need to address the variable of action.Yes, action is taking place but we need to shore up the foundation and look at big picture. The level of action is evolving and I have confidence that it will occur, but in my experience, actions are still somewhat disjointed. Each stakeholder group is addressing the issues within their locus, and there has been growth strategizing with others with similar concerns, but as a system we have a long way to go.The STEM issue is one of the most talked about issues in the USA. I could easily fill my calendar with events, meetings, discussions, conferences and classes that address it. Education is talking about it, as are corporations, as are educators and almost every youth serving organization I can think of.In addition to your wonderful thoughts and insights, I see several other strategies to offer. Steps are being taken to coordinate efforts with K-12 education, higher education, non-formal education, and business. I am sure that the efficiency of these partnerships will come with time. My only concern is that not everyone is on the bus that needs to be…yet.As this rattled around inside my brain, an old joke came to mind…How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? One, but the light bulb has to want to change.As all of these groups work to address this issue, we also need to look at it from all angles. How do we make STEM content areas need fulfilling for the youth? How do we motivate them (and in many cases, how do we stop “unmovtivating” them) to gain and retain interest in STEM education and the potential careers they may one day choose?Once we get them into the pipeline, how do we keep them there? I was one that exited that pipe and I can identify several key reasons why that happened in my case.I have three decades of experience working with youth, youth development, family development, training, and non-formal education. One key element that I haven’t heard too many people talking about is the family. In addition to all of the wonderful ideas you shared about preparing teachers, and changing the political milieu, we need to address the continuum and include the factors that are not yet fully explored including family and linking non-formal and formal education together.How can we also address this issue by creating the family support necessary for the children to be successful in the STEM content areas? If parents are themselves intimidated by STEM content areas, how can we work to tear down those barriers? How can we find the support mechanisms for students that have interest and/or abilities in STEM content areas to continue and not lose interest if there isn’t support at home? I am not talking about parents having to help their children complete their algebra homework, rather having them support their child’s dreams and aspirations and helping them explore options. How can we link formal and non-formal education together to work in concert? How can non-formal educators strengthen programming by looking at career choices and alternatives as part of their process? True some are doing this, but just as true some are not. My only suggestion is that all of these areas need to be strengthened. Finally, once all this has been finished, how do we make sure that all students are playing on the same level field?Equity is one of my core values which brings me around to my interest in all things related to diversity. If we look at our society and our founding fathers, it is easy to see that this country was founded by rich, white, landowners.When a particular group is in power, they do what they can to maintain that power and control. This “one-over” mentality then trickles down through the groups as each tries to strengthen and solidify their stature in the continuum of power. There are many examples: white over black, male over female, rich over poor, educated over non-educated, heterosexual over gay, it goes on and on.Now unfortunately, until we become a “one-with” society where we are all seen and recognized as being equal rather than a “one-over” society where there are institutional “isms”, this is an uphill battle. Wouldn’t it be ideal if there was a level playing field and regardless of the dimension of diversity, all had equal opportunity? We must continue to fight that fight and address the inequities of the institutional “isms” wherever we exist.During this past week, I had the both the pleasure and the honor to represent our National 4-H Science team at the National Center for Woman & Information Technology (NCWIT) Summit in Chicago. I love to immerse myself into learning opportunities and this one was well worth it.One of the workshops I attended was by Dr. Joshua Aronson an Associate Professor of Applied Psychology at NYU. Dr. Aronson shared research that he has been doing on Stereotype Threat, a topic we should all take some time to explore. I learned a lot about the influences of stereotypes and how they influence performance.As thought leaders and system changers, we must all continue to conduct our due diligence, to find the pieces of the puzzles.Thank you for sharing the five principles of good programs by BEST, and they match up with my own of intensity, frequency, duration, systematic, and intentional. The only thing that I would like to offer to your insight on, “led by passionate committed professionals” is that this could also include the facilitation of learning by any caring and committed adult that understands and can utilize inquiry-based learning.Thank you Mr. Wells for making me sit down and “think” about this. You are a thought leader and I appreciate the opportunity.