Whose Job Is It To Support Good Science Education Anyway? Whose Job Is It To Support Good Science Education Anyway? Lorraine Mulfinger, Ph.D. Associate

Whose Job Is It To Whose Job Is It To Support Good Science Support Good Science Education Anyway? Education Anyway?

Lorraine Mulfinger, Ph.D.Lorraine Mulfinger, Ph.D.Associate Professor of ChemistryAssociate Professor of ChemistryJuniata College Science In MotionJuniata College Science In Motion

PA Basic Ed / Higher Ed Partnerships PA Basic Ed / Higher Ed Partnerships in Science & Technologyin Science & Technology

OVERVIEWOVERVIEW

• Defining Defining “Good Science Education”“Good Science Education” and What It Costs and What It Costs

• The The What and WhyWhat and Why of Basic Ed / Higher Ed of Basic Ed / Higher Ed PartnershipsPartnerships

• Funding SourcesFunding Sources for Basic Ed / Higher Ed for Basic Ed / Higher Ed PartnershipsPartnerships

• SustainingSustaining Funding at the State and Local Levels Funding at the State and Local Levels

What IS Good Science?What IS Good Science?

““Back to Basics vs. Hands-On Back to Basics vs. Hands-On Instruction”Instruction”

Washington Post, February 3, 2004Washington Post, February 3, 2004

““The major players: the California The major players: the California Curriculum Commission, which advises Curriculum Commission, which advises the state Board of Education and has the state Board of Education and has recommended new criteria for K-8 recommended new criteria for K-8 textbooks that allow for a maximum of textbooks that allow for a maximum of 20 to 25 percent of hands-on 20 to 25 percent of hands-on material.”material.”


““Back to Basics vs. Hands-On Instruction”Back to Basics vs. Hands-On Instruction”Washington Post, February 3, 2004Washington Post, February 3, 2004

““In opposition are many classroom In opposition are many classroom teachers and scientists – including teachers and scientists – including leaders of the National Academy of leaders of the National Academy of Science and the California Science Science and the California Science Teachers Association – who say the Teachers Association – who say the recommendation makes no sense in a recommendation makes no sense in a field that is all about discovery.”field that is all about discovery.”

What IS Good Science?What IS Good Science?National Science Education StandardsNational Science Education StandardsNational Research Council (1995 -NAS, NAE, NSF, NASA, USDoEd, NIH)National Research Council (1995 -NAS, NAE, NSF, NASA, USDoEd, NIH)

Principals and DefinitionsPrincipals and Definitions““The development of the National Science Education Standards The development of the National Science Education Standards

was guided by certain principals. Those principles are:was guided by certain principals. Those principles are:1.1. Science is for Science is for allall students. students.2.2. Learning is Learning is an activean active process. process.3.3. School science reflects the intellectual and cultural School science reflects the intellectual and cultural

traditions that characterize the practice of the traditions that characterize the practice of the contemporary contemporary sciencescience..

4.4. Improving science education is part of Improving science education is part of systemic education systemic education reformreform..


Principals and DefinitionsPrincipals and Definitions

1.1. Science is for Science is for allall students ( students (EQUITY)EQUITY)..““All students are capable of full participation and of All students are capable of full participation and of

making meaningful contributions in science making meaningful contributions in science classes.”classes.”


Principals and DefinitionsPrincipals and Definitions

2.2. Learning is Learning is an activean active process. ( process. (HANDS-ONHANDS-ON))

……Emphasizing active science learning means Emphasizing active science learning means shifting shifting emphasis away from teachers presenting emphasis away from teachers presenting information and covering science topics.”information and covering science topics.”


Principals and Definitions (Principals and Definitions (UP-TO-DATEUP-TO-DATE))

3.3. School science reflects the intellectual and cultural School science reflects the intellectual and cultural traditions that characterize the practice of the traditions that characterize the practice of the contemporary science.contemporary science.

“…“…students must become familiar with students must become familiar with modes of scientific modes of scientific inquiry, rules of evidence, ways of formulatinginquiry, rules of evidence, ways of formulating questions, and ways of proposing explanations. The questions, and ways of proposing explanations. The relation of science to mathematics and to technology relation of science to mathematics and to technology and and an understanding of the nature of sciencean understanding of the nature of science should should also be part of their education.”also be part of their education.”


Principals and Definitions (Principals and Definitions (REFORMREFORM))

4.4. Improving science education is part of Improving science education is part of systemic systemic education reformeducation reform..

““The components include students and teachers; schools The components include students and teachers; schools with with principals, superintendentsprincipals, superintendents, and , and school boardsschool boards; ; teacher education programs in colleges and teacher education programs in colleges and universities, textbook publishers, communities of universities, textbook publishers, communities of parents and of students, scientist and engineers; parents and of students, scientist and engineers; science museums; businesses and industry; and science museums; businesses and industry; and legislatorslegislators.”.”


How critical is this argument for How critical is this argument for today’s discussion?today’s discussion?

• 20 – 25% hands-on is a minimum of one 20 – 25% hands-on is a minimum of one day/week!day/week!

• PA Basic Ed / Higher Ed Science & Tech PA Basic Ed / Higher Ed Science & Tech Partnerships like (Partnerships like (Science In MotionScience In Motion) wish ) wish to ensure to ensure that hands-on activity occur per that hands-on activity occur per week (with or without our support.)week (with or without our support.)

Science In Motion 1998-1999 - Assessment Results

4 Labs / Month

1st Year Biology Students

02468

101214161820

Pretest Posttest

Que

stio

ns A

nsw

ered

Cor

rect

ly

Control

Science In Motion

1st Year Chemistry Students

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pretest Posttest

Que

stio

ns A

nsw

ered

Cor

rect

ly

Control

Science In Motion


119% Increase

39% Increase

• Science In MotionScience In Motion Assessment Results: Assessment Results:•Students in project schools answered Students in project schools answered twice as twice as

many test questions correctlymany test questions correctly •SIM Students demonstrated SIM Students demonstrated higher-order higher-order

thinking skillsthinking skills •SIM students areSIM students are capable of using the capable of using the

techniquestechniques that modern scientists use. that modern scientists use.

– a consortium-wide assessment is a consortium-wide assessment is underwayunderway


Science In MotionScience In MotionSTUDENT OUTCOMES:STUDENT OUTCOMES:• Better Test ScoresBetter Test Scores• More Meaningful Science Fair More Meaningful Science Fair

ProjectsProjects

• Success in Student BehaviorSuccess in Student Behavior• Produces Students who can Produces Students who can

Function in Modern Labs = Function in Modern Labs = Workforce/Economic Workforce/Economic Development!Development!


What are Higher What are Higher Education/Basic Education/Basic

Education Science Education Science Partnerships & Partnerships &

Why are they Essential Why are they Essential to Good Science to Good Science

Education?Education?

Why Are BE/HE Partnerships Why Are BE/HE Partnerships Essential?Essential?

Systemic Problems In Schools :Systemic Problems In Schools :• School systems areSchool systems are not organized to not organized to

support changesupport change in the classroom. in the classroom.– Not the teachers faultNot the teachers fault– Not the administrations faultNot the administrations fault– Not school boards faultNot school boards fault

• We waste a lot of time pointing We waste a lot of time pointing fingers at people when it is the fingers at people when it is the system.system.

Schools are organized on the model of Schools are organized on the model of assembly line factoriesassembly line factories. Students move . Students move along the assembly line, first grade, along the assembly line, first grade, second grade, third grade, etc. and at second grade, third grade, etc. and at each point certain things are scheduled to each point certain things are scheduled to happen. happen.

……Eventually, the factory becomes outdated.Eventually, the factory becomes outdated.

Systemic Problems (continued)Systemic Problems (continued)

Why Are BE/HE Partnerships Why Are BE/HE Partnerships Essential?Essential?

Breakdowns: TeachersBreakdowns: Teachers• Lack of resourcesLack of resources

– Equipment & supplies are Equipment & supplies are expensiveexpensive• IsolationIsolation

– Lack of professional development opportunities Lack of professional development opportunities involving involving state-of-the-art sciencestate-of-the-art science in the teachers’ in the teachers’ content areacontent area

– Inability to collaborate with other teachers in the Inability to collaborate with other teachers in the same content areasame content area

• Lack of timeLack of time– Full Full teaching schedulesteaching schedules fail to allow time to develop fail to allow time to develop

or even to set up labsor even to set up labs

Breakdowns: Breakdowns: AdministrationAdministration

• Principals and superintendents Principals and superintendents can can not be experts in every areanot be experts in every area

• They They do not have timedo not have time to work to work extensively with each teacherextensively with each teacher

• They also They also lack resourceslack resources

Breakdown: School BoardsBreakdown: School Boards

• School boards are too far School boards are too far removed from removed from the classroomthe classroom to directly affect what to directly affect what happenshappens

• But, they should care about the classroom But, they should care about the classroom and and are accountableare accountable for students for students

• Generally Generally lack experiencelack experience on the board on the board and in educationand in education

THE BOTTOM LINE:THE BOTTOM LINE:Problem:Problem:• Teachers know what they need, but Teachers know what they need, but

school boards school boards control spendingcontrol spending • Boards under community Boards under community pressure to limit pressure to limit

taxestaxes, as are state legislators, as are state legislatorsAnswer:Answer:• Sharing resourcesSharing resources among school districts among school districts

is the most cost effective answeris the most cost effective answer• Higher Ed can contribute infrastructureHigher Ed can contribute infrastructure

without direct costs added to the programwithout direct costs added to the program

THE BOTTOM LINE:THE BOTTOM LINE:

Answer:Answer:An external intervention is An external intervention is needed to produce needed to produce systemic change.systemic change.

• Higher Education Institutions Provide:Higher Education Institutions Provide:– Teacher TrainingTeacher Training– Continuing Professional DevelopmentContinuing Professional Development– Resources for the classroomResources for the classroom– Support IN the classroomSupport IN the classroom

• Cost EfficacyCost Efficacy– Sharing of less frequently used, Sharing of less frequently used,

expensive resourcesexpensive resources– Infrastructure (facilities and Infrastructure (facilities and

personnel) already in placepersonnel) already in place

Solution: Basic Ed / Higher Ed Solution: Basic Ed / Higher Ed Sci & Tech PartnershipsSci & Tech Partnerships

What Teachers say aboutWhat Teachers say aboutSCIENCE IN MOTION:SCIENCE IN MOTION: HANDS-ON SCIENCE HANDS-ON SCIENCE

– The most The most significant programsignificant program in which they in which they have been involvedhave been involved

– They They feel more like scientistsfeel more like scientists– They are They are excitedexcited to have up-to-date lab to have up-to-date lab

activitiesactivities– They have They have neither the time nor the resourcesneither the time nor the resources to to

conduct the same hands-on activities without conduct the same hands-on activities without SIMSIM

Solution: Basic Ed / Higher Solution: Basic Ed / Higher Ed Ed Sci & Tech PartnershipsSci & Tech Partnerships

Programs in U.S.Programs in U.S.•Model Programs in 10 StatesModel Programs in 10 States

Alabama*Alabama*California California Delaware*Delaware*IllinoisIllinoisIndiana*Indiana*

New York New York North CarolinaNorth CarolinaOhioOhioPennsylvania*Pennsylvania*VirginiaVirginia

**Statewide ProgramsStatewide Programs

11 Pennsylvania Sites11 Pennsylvania Sites

University of University of Pittsburgh at Pittsburgh at Bradford Bradford Cedar CrestCedar CrestClarion University Clarion University Drexel University Drexel University Gannon College Gannon College

Gettysburg College Gettysburg College Juniata College Juniata College Susquehanna Susquehanna UniversityUniversityUrsinus College Ursinus College Westminster Westminster College College Wilkes College Wilkes College

12 Alabama Sites12 Alabama Sites• University of North AlabamaUniversity of North Alabama• Athens State CollegeAthens State College• Alabama A&M and University of HuntsvilleAlabama A&M and University of Huntsville• University of AlabamaUniversity of Alabama• University of Alabama at BirminghamUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham• Jacksonville StateJacksonville State• University of MontevalloUniversity of Montevallo• University of South AlabamaUniversity of South Alabama• Alabama State UniversityAlabama State University• Auburn UniversityAuburn University• Troy State UniversityTroy State University

RECONGNIZED SUCCESSRECONGNIZED SUCCESS• Featured by Featured by

– ABC News with Peter Jennings ABC News with Peter Jennings – Nightly Business Review feature with Morley Nightly Business Review feature with Morley

SaferSafer

Winner of the 2004 Innovations Award Winner of the 2004 Innovations Award from the national Council of State from the national Council of State

GovernmentsGovernments

Funding Sources for Funding Sources for Basic Ed / Higher Ed Basic Ed / Higher Ed

PartnershipsPartnerships

• Partnerships should serve:Partnerships should serve:– 16,000 students, K-1216,000 students, K-12

•8-10 Rural School Districts8-10 Rural School Districts

The Ideal Pennsylvania Program...

OR

•Part of a Single Urban School District

Funding for Funding for Basic Ed / Higher Ed Basic Ed / Higher Ed


• Each Partnership would Each Partnership would have:have:– Biology VanBiology Van– Chemistry VanChemistry Van– Physics VanPhysics Van– Elementary VanElementary Van



The funding for these projects would be an average of $55 per year per child.

16,000 Studentsx $55 Per Child

$880,000 Per Year



US EDUCATIONAL SPENDINGUS EDUCATIONAL SPENDING Per Pupil SpendingPer Pupil Spending

AlabamaAlabama $5,601$5,601

PennsylvaniaPennsylvania $7,824$7,824

US AverageUS Average $6,835*$6,835*

*$55 = <1% of total student spending

ALABAMA – ALABAMA – ASIM ANNUAL EXPENDITURESASIM ANNUAL EXPENDITURES

FY 1998-99FY 1998-99 $65.21 per $65.21 per studentstudent

$125,000 $125,000 per per disciplinediscipline





Statewide ExpendituresStatewide Expenditures

12 Alabama Sites12 Alabama SitesStudent Population: 731,000Student Population: 731,000

11 Pennsylvania 11 Pennsylvania SitesSites

Student Population: 1,800,000Student Population: 1,800,0001994/95: $2.71 1994/95: $2.71 millionmillion1995/96: $1.84 1995/96: $1.84 millionmillion1996/97: $2.83 1996/97: $2.83 millionmillion1997/98: $2.57 1997/98: $2.57 millionmillion1998/99: $2.77 1998/99: $2.77 millionmillion1999/00: $2.67 1999/00: $2.67 millionmillion2000/01: $2.44 2000/01: $2.44 millionmillion2001/02: $2.45 2001/02: $2.45 millionmillion

1999/00: $2.50 million1999/00: $2.50 million2000/01: $2.00 million2000/01: $2.00 million2001/20: $2.00 million2001/20: $2.00 million


PartnershipsPartnershipsScience In Motion Funding History

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

Year

Am

ount

Federal (NSF) State

Average <$200,000 per subject

Science In Motion Funding History

$-$50,000

$100,000$150,000$200,000$250,000$300,000$350,000

Year

Am

ount

Federal (NSF) State

Coordination Expenses Added = >$150k


PartnershipsPartnershipsWith Additional Foundation/Private Support ~ $300k

HOW HOW ISIS SCIENCE FUNDED? SCIENCE FUNDED?NationalNational ScienceScience Foundation Foundation

Math & Science Partnerships (MSPs)*Math & Science Partnerships (MSPs)*

Projects FundedProjects FundedTargeted AwardsTargeted Awards

FY ’02FY ’02 FY ‘03FY ‘03 2-Year 2-Year TotalTotal

Math OnlyMath Only 99 1212 2121Science Science OnlyOnly

33 55 88

Math & Math & ScienceScience

55 66 1212*Note Review Criteria: Plan for sustainability

HOW HOW ISIS SCIENCE FUNDED? SCIENCE FUNDED?

The future of (MSPs)The future of (MSPs)

NSFNSF(Direct (Direct

Awards)Awards)

USDoEdUSDoEd(State Block (State Block

Grants)Grants)FY ’02FY ’02 $160 M$160 M $12.5M$12.5MFY ’03FY ’03 $129 M$129 M $101 M$101 MFY ’04FY ’04 $139 M*$139 M* $149 M$149 M

* $120 M may move to USDoEd

SUSTANING FUNDING:SUSTANING FUNDING:Shifting from Federal to State/Local Shifting from Federal to State/Local SupportSupport

Unfunded applications:1998 – Physics Van Expansion (NSF)1999 – Physics Van Expansion (NSF)2001 – Elementary Van Program (Dreyfus)2002 – Statewide K-8 Expansion (NSF/MSP)2003 – Regional K-8 Expansion (NSF/MSP)2003 – Regional K-8 Expansion (PDE/Title II)

SUSTANING FUNDING:SUSTANING FUNDING:Shifting from Federal to State/Local Shifting from Federal to State/Local SupportSupportNSF Mission:“To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense.”

PA State Constitution “…shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of public education…”

PA School Code (School Boards):…review and approve curriculum & text books

...and SCIENCE?...and SCIENCE?

Pennsylvania will not test Pennsylvania will not test science until 2005 at the science until 2005 at the earliest.earliest.

READING, WRITING & READING, WRITING & ‘RITHMATIC‘RITHMATIC

Sustaining Funding Sustaining Funding at State & Local Levelsat State & Local LevelsCURRENT PA FUNDING DILEMMACURRENT PA FUNDING DILEMMA

• PA House and Senate support continue PA House and Senate support continue state fundingstate funding

• Governor Rendell and Secretary for Governor Rendell and Secretary for Education Advocate charging individual Education Advocate charging individual school districts through block grantsschool districts through block grants

Some Arguments for Some Arguments for State Funding:State Funding:

• Constitutional Mandate of the StateConstitutional Mandate of the State• High Tech Workforce Development High Tech Workforce Development

is a state priorityis a state priority• Equity is assured for poorer districtsEquity is assured for poorer districts

Some Arguments for Some Arguments for Local Funding:Local Funding:

• PA School Code emphasizes local PA School Code emphasizes local control (not funding)control (not funding)– School Boards School Boards must approve curriculummust approve curriculum– School Boards School Boards must approve the budgetmust approve the budget

BUTBUT, , • approval does not = fundingapproval does not = funding• local boards cannot create new forms of local boards cannot create new forms of

taxationtaxation• will block grants be used for will block grants be used for science science by by

administrators and boards with other administrators and boards with other priorities?priorities?

CONCLUSION: Short TermCONCLUSION: Short TermIn the current climate, sustained funding In the current climate, sustained funding

will most likely be at the state level:will most likely be at the state level:

• EquityEquity• Cost Efficacy (shared resources)Cost Efficacy (shared resources)• Can enact legislation to raise necessary revenuesCan enact legislation to raise necessary revenues• Department of Ed can coordinate and monitor Department of Ed can coordinate and monitor

spending (prevent out-dated content – but they do spending (prevent out-dated content – but they do not have the resources to provide the program not have the resources to provide the program directly.)directly.)

• Science has a key role in workforce & economic Science has a key role in workforce & economic development – state prioritiesdevelopment – state priorities

CONCLUSION: Long TermCONCLUSION: Long Term

Funding COULD occur at the Funding COULD occur at the federal level if science federal level if science were made a national were made a national priority and was seen as priority and was seen as important as reading and important as reading and mathmath

CRISIS SOLVED BY SCIENCECRISIS SOLVED BY SCIENCE• UnemploymentUnemployment• Infrastructure SupportInfrastructure Support

– Electrical GridElectrical Grid– Computer NetworksComputer Networks– MedicineMedicine– Anti-terrorismAnti-terrorism

PA Basic Ed/Higher Ed PA Basic Ed/Higher Ed Science and Technology Science and Technology PartnershipsPartnerships

• Statewide Project CoordinatorsStatewide Project Coordinators– Dr. Lorraine MulfingerDr. Lorraine Mulfinger

– Dr. Don MitchellDr. Don MitchellJuniata CollegeJuniata College

Huntingdon, PA 16652Huntingdon, PA 16652

814-641-3566 or [email protected] or [email protected]*www.scienceinmotion.org*

*internet links to other higher ed *internet links to other higher ed programprogram

Documents

Whose Job Is It To Support Good Science Education Anyway? Whose Job Is It To Support Good Science Education Anyway? Lorraine Mulfinger, Ph.D. Associate