Event Summary
Our nation's future competitiveness relies on having a workforce highly skilled in mathematics and science. Yet efforts to educate our young people in these critical areas, particularly at the secondary school level, have fallen behind those of almost all other advanced nations. The President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology prepared a report advising the Obama administration on ways to improve science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, especially at the K-12 level.
On September 13, the Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings and Math for America hosted a discussion about key issues in STEM education. A panel of leaders from academia, Congress and the administration, moderated by Brookings Senior Fellow E.J. Dionne, Jr., focused on these critical issues, including the development of a steady supply of outstanding teachers in math, science and technology Eric Lander, co-chair of the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, provided preliminary insights gleaned in the course of the PCAST's ongoing study.
Comments from ERIC LANDER
The PCAST report draws certain key conclusions. First, the organizing principle -- and I give away nothing by saying that the title of the report is “Prepare and Inspire” -- is that we need a two-pronged strategy. We have to focus on preparation to make sure that every student is prepared to be able to learn STEM. But we also have to focus on inspiration, that everyone is inspired enough to learn something about STEM and many of them inspired enough to actually go into STEM.
That’s the first key conclusion and it’s an organizing principle that drives everything that we say in the report -- the kinds of teachers we need, the kind of schools we need, the kind of instructional materials we need -- have to be designed to both prepare and inspire.
We also conclude that the federal government historically over the last quarter century has really lacked a coherent strategy and sufficient leadership capacity for K-12 STEM education. There are programs galore all over federal agencies: a little thing here, a little thing there, et cetera. It’s hard to say it’s part of any coherent strategy. It’s hard to say that many of them have been historically targeted toward the kind of catalytic efforts that have the potential to truly transform STEM education. It’s hard to say that there’s been much appropriate focus on replication and scale up, and it’s very clear that there has been insufficient capacity available at the key agencies focusing on STEM education.
Comments from ERIC LANDER
The PCAST report draws certain key conclusions. First, the organizing principle -- and I give away nothing by saying that the title of the report is “Prepare and Inspire” -- is that we need a two-pronged strategy. We have to focus on preparation to make sure that every student is prepared to be able to learn STEM. But we also have to focus on inspiration, that everyone is inspired enough to learn something about STEM and many of them inspired enough to actually go into STEM.
That’s the first key conclusion and it’s an organizing principle that drives everything that we say in the report -- the kinds of teachers we need, the kind of schools we need, the kind of instructional materials we need -- have to be designed to both prepare and inspire.
We also conclude that the federal government historically over the last quarter century has really lacked a coherent strategy and sufficient leadership capacity for K-12 STEM education. There are programs galore all over federal agencies: a little thing here, a little thing there, et cetera. It’s hard to say it’s part of any coherent strategy. It’s hard to say that many of them have been historically targeted toward the kind of catalytic efforts that have the potential to truly transform STEM education. It’s hard to say that there’s been much appropriate focus on replication and scale up, and it’s very clear that there has been insufficient capacity available at the key agencies focusing on STEM education.
