Higher Education and Its Responsibility to K-12 Schools - The Essential Pipeline For Future Scientists, Mathematicians and Engineers

 
In press:  Association of Women in Science Magazine

In higher education we often focus on recruiting female and minority faculty, supporting dual-career couples (the "two body" problem, on which we have made little progress), attracting the most promising and diverse students, and mentoring our students and new faculty.  All the while we neglect K-12 schools, our critical pipeline.  Even the National Science and Technology Council, in a recent report on the scientific workforce in the 21st century ¹, failed to recognize our greatest single challenge: to ensure that matriculating university students are interested in majors and careers in science and technology-related fields, including primary and secondary education in science and mathematics.

Our undergraduate and graduate programs have made great strides in preparing future scientists, yet parts of the conduit are still leaky, particularly for females and minorities.  Our efforts need to extend into K-12 education.  Disinterest in or avoidance of science or mathematics may reflect lack of exposure, false societal perceptions or stereotypes, inadequate numbers of role models, gender bias in the classroom, and a failure to simultaneously encourage and challenge our students.  We are concerned not only that we are losing students who might choose careers in science and engineering, but also that many talented non-majors are math- and science-phobic—hardly a desired outcome of K-12 education.

Providing outstanding experiences for K-12 students clearly requires the intimate involvement of higher education faculty in preparing the next generation of teachers.  We may need as many as 2.5 million new K-12 teachers in the next ten years---and critical shortages are expected in science and mathematics.  In addition, we must facilitate ongoing professional development to enable current and future teachers to improve their knowledge and skills.  Our participation in basic and continuing teacher education directly affects the lives of the nation's children, their eventual selection of careers, and whether they will be scientifically informed citizens.  We cannot shirk from our collective responsibility and must make clear our commitment to teacher education.

We all know outstanding teachers at all levels, including exceptional higher education faculty who are actively involved in K-12 education.  Nonetheless, there are several barriers to overcome in providing positive experiences for K-12 pupils and a more seamless flow of students into the sciences.  Many scientists make meaningful contributions to K-12 schools as their own children pass through the system.  While important, these connections are diffuse.  As the following examples illustrate, more organized and cohesive work is required.

For many years, aside from giving talks to primary and secondary school students or to high school teachers, I was not involved extensively with K-12 education.  In the early 1990s, however, two other faculty members and I planned and conducted a summer program for girls in science and a workshop for elementary school teachers.  The objective of the latter workshop was to provide teachers with the content, exercises, and materials to bring creative, hands-on lessons into their classrooms.  We were struck not only by the talents and commitment of the participants but also by the constraints they faced in exposing their students to science.  One woman, widely recognized as an outstanding first grade teacher, admitted that in more than 25 years in the classroom, she had never taught science.  It always was scheduled for the last hour on Friday and she never quite got around to it.  Why was science last on her list?  This teacher avoided science because she was uncomfortable with the material and because the subject obviously was not center stage in the minds of the education department or school board.  With the support of the workshop, she now teaches enthusiastically about rocks, trees, and ecosystems.  Fortunately, there is a trend to require that elementary teachers receive more training in mathematics and science.  We must provide them with experiences that will promote their own interest in learning and teaching about science.

Middle school can be an especially critical period for sustaining student interest in science and mathematics.  We need to continue our efforts to improve instruction at this level.  If middle school preparation is not adequate, young women and men may enter high school with a tendency to shy away from subjects like physics or mathematics beyond the minimum graduation requirements.

High school science programs certainly can be outstanding.  Exceptional opportunities, including involvement in bona fide research, are available to some students.  In other cases, however, high school instructors stray from teaching the process of science and instead feed their students large doses of content in the hopes of preparing them for college courses.  But using an introductory college-level textbook in a biology class for high school sophomores may not yield the intended result.  Having to satisfy state-level standards further complicates the picture by encouraging a tendency to teach to "standards of learning" that are measured by multiple choice exams, rather than thinking and reasoning.

We want students to enter college with certain skills, such as the ability to approach problems analytically and with a keen sense of curiosity.  Instead, more often than not, we are confronted with large numbers of students who are ill-prepared or, worse still, who have become fearful of science and mathematics.  How can those of us in higher education help to improve the quality of science and mathematics education in grades K-12 so that more students become interested in careers in science and technology, non-majors are motivated to take courses in those areas, and all students are more comfortable with quantitative problem-solving?  Further, how can we develop partnerships with K-12 teachers, schools of education, and members of the community (including physicians, other health professionals, and engineers) to train teachers and provide them with more professional development opportunities?

First, we must examine what teachers need.  Instructors at all levels must have the confidence to teach science, including the background, interest, and creativity to lead exercises that require design and analysis.  Second, we must mobilize our institutions so that we become partners in teacher preparation across our campuses and with K-12 schools.  If we are to succeed, we must view teacher education as a joint responsibility that is fully supported by the entire institution and its leadership.  The involvement of disciplinary faculty with schools of education and K-12 schools must be recognized and rewarded.  We can also engage our students in work with schools, providing technological support and assistance in conducting demonstrations and other "service-learning" experiences for individuals and student organizations.  We must reorganize our campuses to provide an atmosphere of mutual enterprise designed to prepare the best teachers, who in turn will help train subsequent generations.  All of these efforts must be based on trust, an understanding of K-12 schools, and a desire to work with education faculty and K-12 teachers.  Success also requires that superintendents, principals, vice presidents and deans support and value these partnerships.

The American Council on Education recently wrote to the presidents of all colleges with teacher education programs, calling for them to assign teacher preparation a high priority.  Unfortunately, this letter largely has been ignored.  Perhaps the presidents will begin to respond when their graduates fail basic licensure exams, such as PRAXIS I and II. 

It will require strong and visible leadership within universities and state systems to produce the kind of K-16 (or 18 or 20) connections we need to improve science and mathematics education.  The driving factor is not accountability---it is responsibility.

The university of the future will be organized to prepare teachers via the dedicated commitment of its faculty.  We will be focused on defining the content, character, and delivery of what we collectively believe is needed for teachers at various levels.  We will seek research funding with K-12 schools in mind.  Faculty across campus will be invested in providing the best and most varied instruction possible.  More of our faculty and students will visit K-12 schools and more K-12 teachers will visit our campuses, contributing to discussions about the curriculum, becoming involved in our programs, or participating in research.  I am delighted to participate in and facilitate such collaborations with faculty, other deans and a vice president in a structured way across an entire campus.  Such efforts are not only possible, they are essential.

Reference

1.  National Science and Technology Council.  2000.  Ensuring a strong U.S. scientific, technical and engineering workforce in the 21st Century.  National Science and Technology Council, 34 p.