References

¹ Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics have been called the “STEM fields” in many recent reports and discussions. In this report, the Commission primarily uses “mathematics and science,” which should be understood to include knowledge and skills from the fields of engineering and technology.

² The Unified Agenda.

³ Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz (2008). The Race between Education and Technology, Harvard University Press; see especially chapter 3, “Skill-Biased Technological Change,” and chapter 8, “The Race between Education and Technology.”

⁴ Personal communication to the Commission, November 25, 2008.

⁵ National Research Council (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8.

⁶ National Research Council (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics.

⁷ McKinsey & Company (2009). The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools.

⁸ Pew Internet and American Life Project (2009). Generations Online in 2009.

⁹ National Science Foundation Task Force on Cyberlearning (2008). Fostering Learning in the Networked World: The Cyberlearning Opportunity and Challenge, A 21st Century Agenda for the National Science Foundation.

¹⁰ For the National Science Foundation Math and Science Partnership Network, see hub.mspnet.org.

¹¹ National Center on Education and the Economy (2006). Tough Choices or Tough Times, Jossey-Bass, p. 8. National Research Council (2005). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, p. 2.

¹² Vartan Gregorian (1997). Convocation address, Brown University.

¹³ Bureau of Labor Employment Projections: stats.bls.gov/emp/emptabapp.htm.

¹⁴ Richard Murnane and Frank Levy (2004). The New Division of Labor, Princeton University Press, chapter 3. Data presented by Andreas Schleicher of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on the results of its Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) study of 2006.

¹⁵ Hal Salzman (2007). “Globalization Shifts in Human Capital and Innovation: Policy for Collaborative Advantage & Implications for Education.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.

¹⁶ Presented at the Sutton Trust/Carnegie Corporation Summit on Social Mobility, June 2-3, 2008.

¹⁷ National Center for Education and the Economy (2006). p. 6.

¹⁸ OECD, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 2006. Data presented by Andreas Schleicher, “Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World: Seeing School Systems through the Prism of PISA,” January 25, 2008.

¹⁹ Paul E. Lingenfelter, “More Student Success: A Systemic Solution,” presented at the Carnegie Corporation-University of Minnesota Roundtable, January 9, 2009.

²⁰ President Barack Obama, Address to Joint Session of Congress, February 24th, 2009.

²¹ The survey and focus groups were conducted by Widmeyer Research and Polling. The survey consisted of a 20-minute interview of 977 students (8th to 10th grade) and their parents, for a total of 1,954 interviews. The sample included oversamples of African-American households (185 pairs, or 370 total) and Latino households (140 pairs, or 280 total). The weighted N size—accounting for oversamples—is 904 pairs (1,808 total). The survey was fielded from October 22 to November 4, 2008. Ten focus groups were conducted in Denver and Nashville, with participants recruited from the urban school district and surrounding suburban/exurban districts. The Denver research included two paired urban groups (non-Latino students and their parents), two paired suburban/exurban groups (students and their parents), and one group of urban Latino students. The Nashville research included two paired urban groups (non-African-American students and their parents), two paired suburban/exurban groups (students and their parents), and one group of urban African-American students. For more information on study methods and complete findings, see Widmeyer Research and Polling (April 2009). Attitudes toward Math and Science Education among American Students and Parents, prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. opportunityequation.org/go/widmeyer.

²² Carol S. Dweck (2008). “Mindsets and Math/Science Achievement.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. Dweck demonstrates that student performance is influenced positively by students’ belief that they have the capacity to learn science or math, and that teachers can support that mindset through instructional practice. opportunityequation.org/go/dweck.

²³ American Museum of Natural History (May 2009). “Emboldened Capacity: Science Education and the Infrastructure of Science-Rich Cultural Institutions.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. opportunityequation.org/go/amnh.

²⁴ Information on the New Tech High School model is available at Newtechhigh.org; cell.uindy.edu/NTHS/index.php.

²⁵ For descriptions of Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading and Concept-oriented Reading Instruction, including curricular materials, videos, and research reports, see seedsofscience.org. For information on CORI, see cori.umd.edu.

²⁶ Duke’s Engineering K-PhD Program is described at k-phd.duke.edu.

²⁷ For information on YES, see Youthexploringscience.com.

²⁸ Edumetrics (2007). Summative Assessment of Kinetic City Omega/Sigma Afterschool; see kcmtv.com/about.htm.

²⁹ Agile Mind is a commercial partner of the Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas at Austin; see utdanacenter.org. Uri Treisman, founder and director of the Charles A. Dana Center, is a member of the Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.

³⁰ TeachScape is a commercial teacher development program, cofounded in 1999 by Roy Pea, director of the Stanford Center for Innovations in Learning; see teachscape.com.

³¹ Wireless Generation, Inc., was cofounded by Commission member Larry Berger; see wgen.net.

³² Commission member and science educator Katherine Ward is a member of the faculty of the Exploratorium’s summer teacher education institute.

³³ For the Meyerhoff Scholars Program, see umbc.edu/Meyerhoff/.

³⁴ To learn more about RPI’s progressive dialogue on STEM education see rpi.edu

³⁵ David Coleman and Jason Zimba (2007). Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. The Commission’s thinking in this area has also been informed by the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, whose leadership and support have enabled extensive investigation of standards and how they could be reshaped to foster school improvement more effectively.

³⁶ James B. Hunt, Jr. Testimony before the Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives. April 29, 2009. hunt-institute.org.

³⁷ Achieve (2008). Out of Many, One: Toward Rigorous Common Core Standards from the Ground Up. achieve.org/node/1018.

³⁸ International Benchmarking Advisory Group (2008). Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-class Education. achieve.org/BenchmarkingforSuccess.

³⁹ For information on the Common Core Standards Initiative, including the principles included in the memorandum of agreement, see ccsso.org

⁴⁰ Deborah Loewenberg Ball, Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Jeremy Kilpatrick, R. James Milgram, Wilfried Schmid, Richard Schaar (2009). Reaching for Common Ground in K-12 Mathematics Education, The Mathematical Association of America.

⁴¹ U.S. Department of Education (2008). Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.

⁴² President Barack Obama, Remarks to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on a Complete and Competitive American Education, March 10, 2009.

⁴³ U.S. Department of Education (2008). Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.

⁴⁴ National Research Council (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics.

⁴⁵ Philip Daro (2008). “Mathematics for Whom: The Top of High School Meets the Bottom of College.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. OpportunityEquation.org/go/daro

⁴⁶ Sol Garfunkel (2009) Math to Work, Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. OpportunityEquation.org/go/garfunkel

⁴⁷ Bruce Alberts, “Redefining Science Education”, Science 23 January 2009. sciencemag.org.

⁴⁸ National Research Council (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. p. 2.

⁴⁹ Jason Zimba (2009). “Five Areas of Core Science Knowledge.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. OpportunityEquation.org/go/zimba

⁵⁰ Information about the Core Ideas meeting, along with commissioned papers, will be available though the website of the National Research Council’s Board on Science Education at www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/.

⁵¹ Edward Haertel (2009). “Reflections on Educational Testing: Problems and Opportunities.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. For a review of high school models focusing on 21st century skills, including a case study of New Tech High School, see Elena Silva (2008), Measuring Skills for the 21st Century, Education Sector.

⁵² Brian Rowan, Changing Instruction and Improving Student Learning: Lessons from Comprehensive School Reform. Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. OpportunityEquation.org/go/rowan For information on Quality Core, see act.org/qualitycore.

⁵³ National Research Council (2002). Learning and Understanding: Improving Advanced Study of Mathematics and Science in U.S. High Schools.

⁵⁴ Allan Odden and James A. Kelly (2008). “Strategic Management of Human Capital in Public Education,” Consortium for Policy Research in Education, p. 2.

⁵⁵ Business-Higher Education Forum (2008). “The Case for Predictive Methods in STEM Education Research & Policy Analysis.” Draft concept paper for the STEM Research and Modeling Network. bhef.com/solutions/documents/srmn_concept.pdf.

⁵⁶ Debra Viadero (2009). “Educator Loss in STEM Area Called Issue: Overall Shortage Disputed,” Education Week.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/03/11/24supply_ep.h28.html. Richard M. Ingersoll and David Perla (2009). “The Mathematics and Science Teacher Shortage: Fact and Myth,” CPRE Research Report #RR-62.

⁵⁷ Math and science were teacher shortage areas in 47 states in 2007-08. “Teacher Shortage Areas Nationwide Listing 1990-1991 through 2009-2010,” U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education (2009). ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.

⁵⁸ For example, according to the New Teacher Project’s internal data, 83 percent of its 2008 fellows were teaching in the high-needs subject areas of science, math, and special education. Presentation to the Carnegie Corporation of New York, February 2009.

⁵⁹ Donald Boyd et al. (2008). “The Narrowing Gap in New York City Teacher Qualifications and Its Implications for Student Achievement in High-Poverty Schools,” NBER working paper. (Note: A co-author of this study, Susanna Loeb, is a member of the Carnegie-IAS Commission.) In 2008, a Louisiana Board of Regents report showed that the New Teacher Project’s first-year math teachers had a more positive effect on students than traditionally certified teachers who had taught for 2+ years. Similarly, a 2008 Urban Institute study showed that high-school students taught by TFA corps members performed significantly better on state-required end-of-course exams, especially in math and science, than peers taught by far more experienced instructors. Louisiana TNTP report: regents.state.la.us

⁶⁰ See, for example, the qualifications for the math and science immersion programs of the New York Teaching Fellows Program at nyctf.org/prospective/fellowship.html.

⁶¹ UTeach Natural Sciences was honored in 2009 by Harvard’s Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation as one of the Top 50 Innovations in American Government. http://ashinstitute.harvard.edu/ash/03.31.09_Top50.pdf.

⁶² Susanna Loeb and Pam Grossman (2008). Alternative Routes to Teaching: Mapping the New Landscape of Teacher Education, Harvard Education Press.

⁶³ Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (2001). The Mathematical Education of Teachers.

⁶⁴ John Dossey, Katherine Halvorsen, and Sharon McCrone (2008). Mathematics Education in the United States 2008: A Capsule Summary Fact Book. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, p. 54.

⁶⁵ Julie Greenberg and Kate Walsh (2008). No Common Denominator: The Preparation of Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America’s Education Schools, National Council on Teacher Quality.

⁶⁶ For more information on Urban Advantage, see urbanadvantagenyc.org/home.aspx.

⁶⁷ For more information on Engineering for the Future, see mos.org/etf/.

⁶⁸ Michael Barber, Mona Mourshed, and Fenton Whelan (2007). “Improving Education in the Gulf,” McKinsey Quarterly, p. 44.

⁶⁹ Data on the performance of New Leaders principals are available at nlns.org/Results.jsp.

⁷⁰ Liz Gewirtzman (2008). “An Unorthodox but Pragmatic Approach to National Math and Science Literacy.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.

⁷¹ newvisions.org/dls/AnnualReport2007.pdf

⁷² Odden and Kelly (2008). Strategic Management of Human Capital in Public Education, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

⁷³ Odden and Kelly (2008). Strategic Management of Human Capital in Public Education, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

⁷⁴ Odden and Kelly (2009). Strategic Management of Human Capital 2.0, report to the Carnegie Corporation.

⁷⁵ C.T. Clotfelter, E.J. Glennie, H.F. Ladd, and J.L. Vigdor (2008). “Teacher bonuses and teacher retention in low-performing schools: Evidence from the North Carolina $1,800 Teacher Bonus Program,” Public Finance Review, 36(1), 63-87. Richard M. Ingersoll and David Perla (2009). “The Mathematics and Science Teacher Shortage: Fact and Myth,” CPRE Research Report #RR-62. American Institutes for Research, Teacher Quality Research 2007. air.org

⁷⁶ Donald Boyd et al. (2008). “The Narrowing Gap in New York City Teacher Qualifications and Its Implications for Student Achievement in High-Poverty Schools,” NBER working paper. fn77. David T. Conley (March 2007). Toward a More Comprehensive Conception of College Readiness. Prepared for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Educational Policy Improvement Center, University of Oregon. cepr.uoregon.edu/upload/Gates-College%20Readiness.pdf. Conley defines college readiness as “the level of preparation a student needs in order to enroll and succeed—without remediation—in a credit-bearing general education course at a postsecondary institution that offers a baccalaureate degree or transfer to a baccalaureate program.”

⁷⁸ Susan Goldberger, with Katie Bayerl (January 2008). “Beating the Odds: The Real Challenges Behind the Math Achievement Gap—and What High-Achieving Schools Can Teach Us About How to Close It. Jobs for the Future. Paper prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. Jff.org

⁷⁹ New Visions for Public Schools, for example, sought to build high expectations and engagement into the design of its New Century High Schools by establishing ten “design principles” to guide the work of school creation teams. Eileen M. Foley, Allan Klinge, and Elizabeth R. Reisner (October 2007). Evaluation of New Century High Schools: Profile of an Initiative to Create and Sustain Small, Successful High Schools. Policy Studies Associates, Inc. newvisions.org/schools/downloads/PSAfinal92707.pdf

⁸⁰ Ellen Foley and David Sigler (Winter 2009). “Getting Smarter: A Framework for Districts.” VUE 22, Redesigning the “Central Office.” Annenberg Institute for School Reform. annenberginstitute.org/VUE/archives.php.

⁸¹ Nonprofit organizations that have concentrated on developing, refining, and replicating new school designs include New Visions for Public Schools (newvisions.org); the New Technology Foundation, which replicates the New Technology High School model originally developed in Napa, California (newtechfoundation.org); Urban Assembly (urbanassembly.org); and Green Dot Public Schools (greendot.org). See their websites for examples of school models.

⁸² National Research Council ( 2004.) Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students’ Motivation to Learn. Chapter 2, “The Nature and Conditions of Engagement.” and chapter 4, “Climate, Organization, Composition, and Size of Schools,” pages 31-59.

⁸³ National Research Council ( 2004.) Engaging Schools. Chapter 4, “Climate, Organization, Composition, and Size of Schools,” pages 97-119.

⁸⁴ W. Norton Grubb and Jeannie Oakes (October 2007). “Restoring Value” to the High School Diploma: The Rhetoric and Practice of Higher Standards. epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0710-242-EPRU.pdf. Grubb and Oakes recommend a “multiple pathways” approach to high school reform, through the creation of schools “structured around a coherent theme, either broadly occupational or non-occupational. Focus on a single theme nurtures multiple concepts of rigor.”

⁸⁵ Nora H. Sabelli (2008). “Applying What We Know to Improve Teaching and Learning.” Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. Sabelli calls for accelerating the development of new technologies that can improve student and teacher learning and support the reorganization of schooling for greater effectiveness. opportunityequation.org/go/Sabelli.

⁸⁶ Shirley Malcom (2007). Broadening Participation in STEM: Challenges and Opportunities. Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. opportunityequation.org/go/malcom.

⁸⁷ Widmeyer Research and Polling (April 2009). Attitudes toward Math and Science Education among American Students and Parents, prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. opportunityequation.org/go/widmeyer.

⁸⁸ National Science Foundation Task Force on Cyberlearning (2008). Fostering Learning in the Networked World: The Cyberlearning Opportunity and Challenge, A 21st Century Agenda for the National Science Foundation. nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf08204.

⁸⁹ In New York City, for example, new small secondary schools created since 2002 are graduating approximately 70 percent of their students—nearly double the rate of the large, dysfunctional high schools they replaced.

⁹⁰ The Brooklyn Botanic Garden, for example, established the Brooklyn Academy of Science and the Environment High School (BASE) in 2003 in collaboration with the New York City Department of Education, New Visions for Public Schools, and the Prospect Park Alliance. A small, public high school, BASE uses the Garden and Prospect Park for extensive field study activities by students. www.bbg.org/edu/base.html

⁹¹ A prime example of an ambitious new public-private partnership is the National Math and Science Initiative (NMSI), founded in 2005 with significant lead funding from Exxon-Mobil Corporation, joined by the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. UTeach and Advanced Placement Strategies are also founding members, and NMSI has begun to invest in a significant, multi-state scale-up of their services, along with other strategies to improve K-12 math and science education. nationalmathandscience.org

⁹² American Museum of Natural History (May 2009). Emboldened Capacity: Science Education and the Infrastructure of Science-Rich Cultural Institutions. Prepared for the Carnegie-IAS Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. opportunityequation.org/go/amnh.

⁹³ Information on SERP and current field research is available at serpinstitute.org.

⁹⁴ See hbs.edu/pelp.