April 4, 2001
Math, Science Teaching Pegged For More Aid
By David J. Hoff
Education Week
Washington
President Bush and congressional Republicans are planning to increase the
money available for math and science teachers' professional development, but
advocates for the cause are asking: Is it enough?
Mr. Bush has proposed providing up to $2.8 billion a year for
teacher-development programs that would be available for teachers of all
subjects. On top of that, he would finance statewide efforts to raise skills
of mathematics and science teachers. House and Senate school improvement
bills now working their way through Congress would put those ideas into law.
But some champions of math and science education maintain that the programs
fall short of the multibillion-dollar effort they say is vital to ensure
that schools have the highly qualified teachers needed for those subjects.
"It's good as far as it goes," said Rep. Rush D. Holt, D-N.J. "But for us to
address the teacher shortage, it's going to take a major commitment. We need
a much better climate of continuous professional development. I don't see
that kind of ambitious investment in either the authorizing bill or the
budget process."
Mr. Holt, a physicist, was a member of the so-called Glenn Commission that
called for $3 billion to improve the quality of mathematics and science
teachers. The commission's wish list suggested that each state conduct an
assessment of needed improvements, hold summer institutes and year-round
study groups for teachers, and provide scholarships and fellowships for
prospective teachers. ("Effort To Recruit Math, Science Teachers Urged,"
Oct. 4, 2001.)
Under the Republican bills, programs for math and science teachers would be
guaranteed around $400 million in fiscal 2002, but could receive much more
if school districts considered them a priority, an administration official
said.
"We believe they'll continue to put a tremendous focus on math and science,"
said Sandy Kress, the senior education adviser to President Bush. "Within
the framework of the accountability system, we think there should be more
flexibility on the local level. People who are held accountable for those
subjects will put a heavy focus on them in professional development."
But advocates for math and science educators suggest that their subjects
will lose out in local battles for funding.
"If it says 'reading and math,' all the bucks go to reading," said Gerald F.
Wheeler, the executive director of the National Science Teachers
Association, based in Arlington, Va. "Science, especially at the elementary
school level, is the forgotten topic."
Set- Asides vs. Flexibility
Teacher professional development is the second title in the mammoth House
and Senate bills to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
The bills include the heart of President Bush's "No Child Left Behind"
education proposals. It would require states to assess students' reading and
math skills every year from the 3rd through the 8th grades and start new
reading programs to build students' skills.
The House and Senate bills contain similar approaches to improving the
quality of teachers in all subject areas. They differ mostly in the funding
levels set for the programs.
Both would dissolve the existing $250 million Dwight D. Eisenhower
Professional Development Program, which focuses on mathematics and science
education, and replace it with a program that would serve teachers of all
disciplines. The Senate would authorize up to $3 billion to be spent on the
project, about $800 million more than the House would.
The authorization level sets an upper limit that the program can receive.
Once a bill is passed, Congress can appropriate however much it wishes under
the cap.
Without specific set-asides for math and science, advocates for the subjects
say, those fields would lose a crucial funding source that has been in place
since President Reagan proposed the creation of the Eisenhower program in
the mid- 1980s.
"There should be set-asides [for math and science teachers] because there's
still so much to be done," argued Lee V. Stiff, the president of the
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and a professor of mathematics
education at North Carolina State University in Raleigh. "Given the teacher
shortage, we can't just say, 'Kick them to the curb. Let's bring in a whole
new batch.' "
President Bush, however, is committed to letting districts choose how to
spend the money that gets passed to them through a prescribed formula based
on population and poverty rates.
"We don't think you need to lead school district folks by the nose," Mr.
Kress said. "If we tell them what the goals are, and if we have an
accountability system, they'll find their way to it."
The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee approved its
ESEA bill last month. The full Senate is slated to debate the bill at the
end of this month. The House Education and the Workforce Committee is also
scheduled to consider a bill late this month.
Competitive Partnerships
While the overall teacher-development program would not focus on math and
science education, as the Eisenhower program does, the House and Senate
bills would create a new competitive-grant program focused on those two
subjects. The measures are similar to the one Mr. Bush proposed.
Under both bills, "partnerships" of states, colleges and universities, and
school districts could compete for funding to improve math and science
teaching. The Senate bill would authorize $500 million for the partnerships;
the House bill would allow up to $390 million.
The projects would be in line with the needs assessment that the Glenn
Commission proposed for every state, according to Linda P. Rosen, who was
the executive director of the project. But it doesn't require states to be
as comprehensive as the panel's report suggests.
"There's some real promise for forward-looking proposals that map well with
the Glenn Commission," said Ms. Rosen, who is now the senior vice president
for education at the National Alliance of Business.
But, Ms. Rosen said, the funding for the partnership program may not be
enough. "What none of us knows is how far $500 million goes," she said.
"What I don't know is how many partnerships would be funded and at what
magnitude."
While the House plan would require that winning partnerships include a
high-poverty district, the NSTA's Mr. Wheeler suggests that well-heeled
areas would tend to dominate the groups receiving the awards. "The have-not
school districts are not going to be able to compete at that level," he
said.
--
This is the CPS Science Teacher List.
To unsubscribe, send a message to
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For more information:
<http://home.sprintmail.com/~mikelach/subscribe.html>.
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/science%40lists.csi.cps.k12.il.us/>
