Posted By: Kevin Schofield | Mar 22nd, 2006 @ 12:46 AM

In the State of the Union Address, there was much hoopla about the President's new American Competitiveness Initiative, and his desire to improve math and science education in the United States.

Sadly, the truth is more complex. While the White House's proposed budget increases funding for basic research in science and engineering (this is much needed and I heartily approve), it continues to leave the NSF's math and science education programs impoverished. Some are arguing, in fact, that the research funding increase is coming at the expense of education funding. I'm not enough of an expert at reading government budgets to tell.

Here is an article discussing the House Science Committee's comments on the proposed budget as it relates to these issues. It looks like they have a lot of work to do.

We need to resist the temptation to pit research and education against each other, because in practice research is education: most of the low-level work in science and engineering research is done by graduate students under the supervision of faculty, and this is a critical part of the grad students' education to learn to be a researcher.

But the hard part is: in a zero-sum budget, something has to give.

Tags:
Rating:
0
0
It is interesting to see the <a href="http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/03/16/undergrad">Carl Wieman quotes</a> in the light of this recent news from <a href="http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/brian/archives/024272.html">Brian Lamb</a>. 

It will be fascinating to see if Wieman is able to apply his ideas about the teaching of undergraduate science at the University of British Columbia. I know that in the coursework part of my M.Sc in IT studies, the most valuable experiences came out of the on-line discussions among the students, along with a tight syllabus that we were held to every week.  It seemed that we were delivering the course for ourselves and the instructor was our facilitator.  I found that quite stimulating and engaging.
Unfortunately I feel that like this budget, public schools have too much bureaucracy to do anything more than take the money and not give the students much in return.

I believe the key is more math and science, but a total restructuring of the current public school system is what is needed or dismantlement. Math and schience scores are great at alternative high schools like "Harry S. Truman High School" http://www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/public/media/newsletters/possibilities/fall_01.htm

I wish we didn't pit research and education because as you say, "research is education" and I also believe the best in education is research for the mind.  Learners of all ages assess their experiences and choose what they wish to synthesis.  For some reason, too few are choosing mathematics and science.  Simply having more undergraduates in a particular area will not solve our educational issues.  These people may choose to do something else, as is their right.  

We need to appreciate the fact that most teachers feel a calling to teach and have an inherent desire to learn.  I believe the real issue lies within determining methods to systemically restructure the current system, raise current standards, and provide more opportunities to our youth.  This should be a dynamic process to adjust to our ever changing needs. 

Research and Math Education: 

Leading Minds K-12 Math Education Forum, Spring 2008

What's Missing from Math Standards?

If you read the article entitled "Where Has All the Knowledge Gone?" by Jo Boaler in Education Week, you should also be aware of this Close Examination.

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel's final report was released March 13 of this year.  In many states, the "Major Topics of School Algebra" have yet to be addressed.