<
 
 
 
 
×
>
hide
You are viewing a Web site, archived on 13:54:50 Oct 20, 2004. It is now a Federal record managed by the National Archives and Records Administration.
External links, forms, and search boxes may not function within this collection.
NSF Division of Undergraduate Education

SHAPING THE FUTURE

New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology

Executive Summary

Under the auspices of the Education and Human Resources (EHR) Directorate of the National Science Foundation (NSF), a committee of the Advisory Committee to EHR has conducted an intensive review of the state of undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SME&T;) in America. The purpose of this review was to "consider the needs of all undergraduates attending all types of U.S. two- and four-year colleges and universities," addressing "issues of preparation of K-12 teachers in these fields, the needs of persons going into the technical work force, the preparation of majors in these areas, and the issue of science literacy for all." [1]

This is the final report of the committee, which was to be "action oriented, recommending ways to improve undergraduate education in SME&T; ... not just to the NSF but, as appropriate, to mission-oriented Federal agencies, business and industry, academic institutions and their faculties and administrations, professional societies, private sector organizations, state and local government, and to other stakeholders in undergraduate education." [1]

While the focus of this review was undergraduate SME&T; education, that is just one part of the continuum of SME&T; education in America that runs from pre-school through postgraduate work. The various parts of this continuum are interdependent; undergraduate SME&T; education depends on the students who come from grades K-12, relies on faculty who come out of graduate programs, and prepares teachers for the K-12 system and students for graduate school. The kinds of programs offered for graduate students have significant implications for the future of undergraduate education; the professional standards adopted for student learning in grades K-12 impact undergraduate education as well. So, these sectors have mutual obligations to each other, and the fulfillment of those obligations is essential for the health of the whole.

Furthermore, as K-12 education changes, as a result not only of standards but of new emphases on inquiry, on active learning, and with new uses of technology, students will come to undergraduate education with new expectations, increasing pressure for reform at this level as well. And to sustain the kind of reform occurring in our nation's elementary and secondary schools, changes in undergraduate education, perhaps particularly in teacher preparation, will be essential. For all these reasons, this report and its recommendations are important to all parts of the continuum of SME&T; education in the United States.

The goal – indeed, the imperative – deriving from our review is that:

America's undergraduates – all of them – must attain a higher level of competence in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. America's institutions of higher education must expect all students to learn more SME&T;, must no longer see study in these fields solely as narrow preparation for one specialized career, but must accept them as important to every student. America's SME&T; faculty must actively engage those students preparing to become K-12 teachers; technicians; professional scientists, mathematicians, or engineers; business or public leaders; and other types of "knowledge workers" and knowledgeable citizens. It is important to assist them to learn not only science facts but, just as important, the methods and processes of research, what scientists and engineers do, how to make informed judgments about technical matters, and how to communicate and work in teams to solve complex problems. America's businesses and industry, governments, and foundations must provide active assistance and support in this critical endeavor. In an increasingly technical and competitive world with information as its common currency, a society without a properly educated citizenry will be at great risk and its people denied the opportunity for a fulfilling life.

The year-long review of undergraduate SME&T; education leading to this report has revealed that significant change is occurring and that important and measurable improvements have been achieved in the past decade. Much of this progress is attributable to the leadership of the NSF, following the National Science Board's issuance of the 1986 report, "Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education," NSB 86-100 ("the Neal Report") [2]. That report called for a significant program of support for undergraduate SME&T; education and assigned primary, but not exclusive, responsibility for this activity to a separate division staffed by scientists, mathematicians, and engineers from many disciplines – now NSF's Division for Undergraduate Education – having the education of undergraduate students as its first priority.

The implementation of the 1986 Neal Report, despite funding of several key instruction-oriented programs at considerably reduced levels over what was recommended, has produced many positive results over the past decade. This success on the part of the NSF has reflected faithfully the dual mission of the Foundation in research and education and the conviction not only of the NSF but also of this committee that undergraduate SME&T; education is the responsibility of scientists, mathematicians, engineers, and technologists alike.

Since the time of the Neal Report and the study that led up to it, the world has changed. The Cold War has ended, and public interest in and support of science have waned correspondingly. The use of new technology is exploding in all aspects of life. The economy is vastly different, with many fewer unskilled but high-paying jobs available to those without technical preparation. The demography of America and of its student population are changing dramatically.

Notwithstanding promising progress in SME&T; education (many examples of which appear in the body of this report), much more remains to be done; there is now a broader and even more urgent agenda than there was in 1986. This message comes from the many contributors to this review: from focus groups of students and graduates, from testimony of employers, faculty, and administrators, from previous studies and surveys of all kinds. Despite the observation that America's basic research in science, mathematics, and engineering is world-class, its education is still not. America has produced a significant share of the world's great scientists while most of its population is virtually illiterate in science. Undergraduate SME&T; education in America is typically still too much a filter that produces a few highly-qualified graduates while leaving most of its students "homeless in the universe." [3]

Too many students leave SME&T; courses because they find them dull and unwelcoming. Too many new teachers enter school systems underprepared, without really understanding what science and mathematics are, and lacking the excitement of discovery and the confidence and ability to help children engage SME&T; knowledge. Too many graduates go out into the workforce ill-prepared to solve real problems in a cooperative way, lacking the skills and motivation to continue learning.

Meanwhile, the world does not stand still. Knowledge keeps growing, new fields arise, other nations improve their educational systems, and new needs emerge. Governments at the state and federal level; business, industry, and the professional community; institutions of higher education; and the National Science Foundation, playing a key leadership role, must work together with a sense of urgency to make the necessary improvements. Students, for their part, must take learning more seriously.

The pressures on America's two- and four-year colleges and universities and on their students, facing an uncertain world of very constrained resources, are great. We do not ask for more of the same effort but rather for a more productive and rewarding kind of undergraduate SME&T; education that produces long-lasting results more effectively and excitingly for both students and faculty.

The testimony of hundreds of participants in this review over the last year has led to a number of recommendations. These recommendations (detailed in somewhat different order in the body of the report) are for action to be taken by:

Institutions of higher education
We recommend that:

  • SME&T; faculty: Believe and affirm that every student can learn, and model good practices that increase learning; start with the student's experience, but have high expectations within a supportive climate; and build inquiry, a sense of wonder and the excitement of discovery, plus communication and teamwork, critical thinking, and life-long learning skills into learning experiences.

  • SME&T; departments: Set departmental goals and accept responsibility for undergraduate learning, with measurable expectations for all students; offer a curriculum engaging the broadest spectrum of students; use technology effectively to enhance learning; work collaboratively with departments of education, the K-12 sector and the business world to improve the preparation of K-12 teachers (and principals); and provide, for graduate students intending to become faculty members, opportunities for developing pedagogical skills.

  • Governing boards and administrators: Reexamine institutional missions in light of needs in undergraduate SME&T; education; hold accountable and develop reward systems for departments and programs stressing the importance of SME&T; education for all students; provide strong programs of faculty development; value and reward faculty who demonstrably facilitate student learning; reduce organizational rigidities, e.g., foster interdisciplinary work; make an institution-wide commitment to the preparation of K-12 teachers, in partnership with the schools; and support research and faculty dialogue on how undergraduates learn.

  • Accrediting agencies: Incorporate principles of sound undergraduate SME&T; education into accreditation criteria, focusing on student learning, not just on organizational and process issues.

    Business, industry, and the professional community

    We recommend that:

  • Business and industry: Help those making public policy decisions understand the critical importance of quality SME&T; education; make clear to educational institutions their expectations about graduates; and provide both partnerships and funding to colleges and universities to advance institution-wide reform initiatives.

  • National and regional media: Become better informed about the condition of undergraduate SME&T; education in the United States and better inform the public about its critical significance for the nation's future.

  • Professional societies: Through journals and programs, honor and support education as well as research.

  • Publishers and testing agencies: Develop, validate, and disseminate materials and assessment tools incorporating desired goals for learning.

    Governments at the state and federal level

    We recommend that:

  • The President and Congress: Develop a new social contract with higher education, to put in place processes to sustain the relative excellence of the nation's higher education and so prepare the U.S. for a new century.

  • Other Federal funding agencies and foundations: Make strategic investments in support of the common agenda for improving undergraduate SME&T; education.

  • State governments and higher education boards: Ensure that funding formulas and state policies provide incentives and rewards for excellent undergraduate SME&T; education; and encourage collaborations among institutions, including sound articulation understandings.

    The National Science Foundation
    We recommend that the NSF:

  • Make clear the high priority of undergraduate education. To do so, it is crucial to have within NSF a unit (the Division of Undergraduate Education, within EHR), staffed by practicing scientists, mathematicians, engineers, and technologists from many disciplines, that has undergraduate education as its first priority and that relates to all institutions providing undergraduate SME&T; education. This Division must continue to maintain strong linkages with NSF's discipline-oriented research directorates, which in turn must continue to support undergraduate education within their specific fields.

  • Aggressively improve undergraduate SME&T; education through a variety of programs, beyond the base recommended in the Neal Report. A doubling of the present funding level in real dollars in the next decade will be needed to erase the gap between that recommended base and present program funding levels, and to extend the benefits of those programs to all SME&T; students.

    Further, we recommend that the Foundation:

  • Lead the development of a common agenda for improving SME&T; education.
  • Give more priority to implementation, particularly of K-12 teacher preparation programs, faculty enhancement, and institutional reform, without diminishing support of innovative ideas and individual faculty curricular and pedagogical improvements.
  • Lead the development of and provide support for a research agenda in human learning at the undergraduate level, using the results to evaluate programs (including long-term evaluation of student learning outcomes) and guide future program development.
  • Develop an effective means of validating, codifying, and disseminating good practices in undergraduate SME&T; education.

    In all of its undergraduate programs, NSF should put emphasis on implementation of what is known to work, on genuine institutional change, and on sustainability of hard-won improvements. All of NSF's directorates should:

  • Continue their support of strong activities to correct underrepresentation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities among students and faculty at the undergraduate level;
  • Support outreach activities that bring SME&T; to the general public; and
  • Consider funding mechanisms that both assign responsibility and provide incentives and rewards for achieving excellence in undergraduate programs not just to individuals, but to whole departments and entire institutions.

    Our final recommendation is that the National Science Foundation accept leadership of the efforts necessary to implement all these recommendations. This is an exciting agenda for action that concentrates on achievable goals. It requires a change in the way we think about SME&T; education more than it calls for more hours or dollars spent on a task. It requires motivation as well as money, commitment as well as competence, and an interest in students as well as in science. Carrying out this agenda will be an energizing and exciting adventure in what is surely the most challenging and awesome enterprise in the world - human learning.


    References and Notes for Executive Summary


    To order Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology (NSF 96-139; Executive Summary only as 96-141) call 703-306-1666 or send an e-mail to undergrad@nsf.gov and ask to be put on the mailing list for the document when it is printed (est. late fall, 1996)


  • Browse the next section in the report
  • Back to document contents page