Intersociety statement on "The Better Education for Students and Teachers
Act" and reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
March 19, 2001
The science, mathematics, engineering and technology communities commend
the 107th Congress for making K-12 education a top priority. Improving teaching
and learning in science, mathematics, engineering and technology is of critical
importance to our economy, our national security, and the future job prospects
of our children. We are pleased that "The Better Education for Students
and Teachers Act" recognizes this urgent need by creating a new, separate
section (Part B of Title II) to address science and mathematics education.
While we applaud the measures that have already been proposed, further steps
can be taken. We suggest the following modifications to further strengthen
the science, mathematics, engineering and technology components of this legislation:
Maintain a priority for funds under Title II for mathematics and science
teacher professional development:
Title II of ESEA (Eisenhower state
grants) currently sets aside funds specifically for mathematics and science
teacher professional development, in recognition
of the urgent national need for improvement in these subject areas. To
ensure that all mathematics and science teachers benefit from Title II
Part A funds
in the ESEA bill voted out of the Senate HELP Committee, we urge that language
be included that targets a portion of this grant be used strictly for professional
development for all teachers.
Professional development in interdisciplinary
activities such as technology/engineering education that integrate
and apply mathematics and science skills should be
included, where state content and performance standards for these activities
have been established.
Expand the scope of Math and Science Partnerships (Title II, Part
B):
We
salute Congress for creating a new, separate program designed to improve
science and mathematics education. We strongly support this style of partnership
activity as a tool for improving teaching and learning in science, mathematics,
engineering and technology. However, with grants allocated on a competitive
basis it would appear that only a minority of teachers will benefit from
this program, and funds may not be allocated where the need is greatest.
As such,
we recommend expanding Title II, Part B in the following ways:
Funding to
states on a formula basis should be considered, with States allocating
sub-grants in accordance with their State improvement plan, to best meet assessed
needs and with a merit-based review of proposals. It should be clearly
specified that Part B funds are intended to supplement, rather than supplant,
the professional
development funds of Part A.
In cases where direct partnerships with institutes of higher education
do not best meet the local needs, for example in a rural district with
no
nearby college but with other quality local resources, use of funds for
merit-reviewed local activities should be permitted. Such local activities
should involve collaboration with institutes of higher education wherever
possible.
Innovative interdisciplinary activities that integrate and apply mathematics
and science skills, such as technology/engineering should be allowed
under this Part. In particular, college and university engineering departments
should be able to establish partnerships. Recruitment and preparation
of
teachers with majors in engineering should be an authorized partnership
activity.
The list of authorized partnership activities should be extended to include:
Development and implementation of master teacher programs for K-8 classrooms
Mentoring and induction programs for new teachers
Summer experiential/research externships for teachers
Development of quality assessments that are aligned with standards and
curricula
Target distribution of Title II funds according to comprehensive,
long-term state improvement plans, based on statewide needs-assessments
of teacher
quality:
We applaud the significant investment of $3,000,000,000 for
enhancement of teacher quality under Part A of Title II. To ensure that
this investment has
maximal impact on teaching and learning, funds should first be provided
for States and Local Educational Authorities to conduct together a detailed
assessment
of their needs for teacher quality and professional development. The needs-assessment
should be conducted in collaboration with educators, business and nonprofit
groups, should address needs in specific subject areas such as mathematics
and science, and should result in a strategic long-range State plan for
improvement of teacher quality. Funds should be provided in fall of 2001
to enable needs
assessment and planning activities to be carried out in preparation for
the 2002 school year. Activities subsequently funded under Title II should
be
in alignment with the State improvement plan.
Include science in assessment and accountability provisions, in addition
to reading and mathematics:
Research shows that teaching time shifts toward subject matter that is assessed.
An exclusive focus on testing reading and mathematics may inadvertently
harm science teaching and learning, by reducing available classroom time.
We urge
inclusion of science in testing provisions, as is proposed by ESEA reauthorization
bills S303, HR340 and HR345.
| 
| 
| 
