American Museum of Natural History (2009). Emboldened Capacity: Science Education and the Infrastructure of Science-Rich Cultural Institutions.

This paper describes the proceedings and outcomes of two meetings convened by the American Museum of Natural History in association with the Carnegie-IAS Commission: a “national summit on science education,” held in 2008, and a follow-up meeting of Carnegie-IAS commissioners and leading museum directors and scientists, held in 2009. The paper examines the role that science cultural institutions can play in K-12 science learning. In addition to outlining the high-priority science education needs of school districts, the paper explores the role of museums in successful partnerships and describes promising models, barriers to partnerships, and design components such as standards and relevant accountability measures. Read the paper Download the Paper

Deborah Loewenberg Ball (2008). Improving Mathematics Learning: Where Are We and Where Do We Need to Head?.

Ball reviews lessons from the last fifty years of research on math education and makes four recommendations to improve math education: providing sustained professional development centered on how students think, using classroom examples; supporting research on effective instruction; mobilizing experts across disciplines to improve the practice of math teaching; and coordinating reform efforts to avoid working at cross-purposes. Read the paper Download the Paper

Philip Daro (2008). Mathematics for Whom? The Top of High School Meets the Bottom of College.

In addressing the Commission’s question about “what” should be taught in mathematics, Daro makes the case that Algebra II and its related math course sequence is an “unnecessarily difficult barrier” to high school graduation and college entrance and fails to reflect the needs of the broader student population. Daro asserts that most college students don’t need Algebra II in order to be successful in their academic or professional careers but rather quantitative literacy and numeracy skills that support academic achievement in non-math majors such as pre-law and the humanities. Daro then challenges public and private colleges to identify alternative mathematics pathways for the US K-16 system by defining the mathematics needed for academic and professional success in broad range of fields; formulating a few well designed college mathematics courses geared to prepare students to meet the quantitative needs of a full array of majors and professional schools; and designing a second pathway through high school mathematics as an alternative to the Algebra II strand. Read the paper Download the Paper

David Coleman and Jason Zimba (2007). Math and Science Standards That Are Fewer, Clearer, Higher to Raise Achievement at All Levels.

Coleman and Zimba argue that current U.S. mathematics and science standards do not promote high levels of student learning and call upon the Commission to press for the following actions: states should establish fewer, clearer, and higher content standards; educators should engage in more pragmatic analysis of what students actually need to know to be workforce-ready, and what that implies for the teaching of math and science; K-12 and higher education should align programs toward dramatically raising the number and diversity of students performing at the highest levels in math and science; and, schools and teachers should institute deliberate and evaluative practice as a means to increase the number and diversity of high performers in math and science. Read the paper Download the Paper

Carol Dweck (2008). Mindsets and Math/Science Achievement.

Dweck contends that to increase student mastery of math and science learning, instructional techniques and curriculum tools need to be developed that focus on shifting student attitudes about learning towards what she terms a “growth mindset.” Dweck defines the growth mindset as a belief that “intellectual abilities can be cultivated and developed through application and instruction.” According to Dweck, research has shown that teaching and curriculum tools aligned to this growth mindset can positively impact how a student views his or her ability to learn, ultimately leading to higher achievement in math and science. She concludes with a recommendation that teacher preparation and professional development programs train teachers how to use growth mindset techniques in the classroom. Read the paper Download the Paper

Sol Garfunkel (2009). Math to Work.

Garfunkel argues that the questions of “how to teach” and “what to teach” in relation to mathematics can be answered only by identifying the needs of students for work, daily life, good citizenship, and further academic studies. He posits that math should be taught in the context of “mathematical modeling,” which he defines as the process of analyzing and solving real problems. This approach to teaching would, according to Garfunkel, necessarily require the integration of different branches of mathematics in the classroom. He also encourages the development of an alternative pathway or curriculum sequence for mathematic study that prepares students to be proficient at quantitative reasoning. In addressing the question of how to drive such a transformation in the teaching and learning of mathematics, Garfunkel reasons that change must begin at the college level, with staff development to prepare college faculty to teach the new curriculum sequence and revision of college placement tests and admissions criteria. Read the paper Download the Paper

Liz Gewirtzman (2008). An Unorthodox but Pragmatic Approach to National Math and Science Literacy.

Gerwirtzman tackles the question of how schools and teachers can spur students to deeper mathematics and science learning. She contends that the major obstacles to high academic achievement in math and science in the public k-12 education system are ineffective school design and weak instructional leadership. As a solution, Gerwirtzman proposes a nationally agreed-upon math and science literacy curriculum and individualized instruction that draw on what is known about the order in which students learn best. Read the paper Download the Paper

Susan Goldberger with Katie Bayerl (2007). Beating the Odds: The Real Challenges Behind the Math Achievement Gap—and What High-Achieving Schools Can Teach Us About How to Close It..

Goldberger examines a large and persistent educational inequity: the gap in math achievement along income and race lines. She explores several obstacles to closing this gap that deserve more attention, including such factors as discouragement and disengagements among middle-school math students and the failure of math classrooms to address the psychological learning needs of students who have not experienced success in math. In brief case studies, Goldberger presents lessons learned in the math classrooms of high performing schools in high need communities such as University Park Campus School in Worcester, MA, and other Early College High Schools. Read the paper Download the Paper

Edward H. Haertel (2009). Reflections on Educational Testing: Problems and Opportunities.

Haertel examines the impact of testing on student learning with particular attention to unintended consequences of current practices. He argues that testing does not necessarily meet its intended goals; that it does not reflect the inequity of opportunity in student learning; and that it does not necessarily encourage the type and extent of learning desired. Haertel then outlines specific strategies for improving educational testing including portfolio-based school accountability; matrix-sampled school-level performance assessments; curriculum-embedded formative assessments; better high-stakes tests; and technical improvements to NCLB implementation. He concludes that reform efforts should focus simultaneously on changes in tests themselves and on the ways in which tests are used or interpreted. Read the paper Download the Paper

Shirley M. Malcolm (2007). Broadening Participation in STEM: Challenges and Opportunities.

Examining undergraduate and graduate degree attainment and selected career paths for minority and women in the STEM fields, Malcolm contends that the United States will not have the capacity to produce the needed continuous stream of STEM professionals unless a more strategic effort is made to recruit and retain students from under-represented groups. She identifies the main obstacles as lack of access and opportunity and suggests a possible solution in more effectively leveraging partnerships with museums, science and technology centers, and universities. Read the paper Download the Paper

Brian Rowan (2007). Changing Instruction and Improving Student Learning: Lessons from Comprehensive School Reform.

Rowan reviews education reform measures and movements of the past half century—including new textbooks, increased graduation requirements, standards-based reform and accountability, and comprehensive school reform—and extrapolates conditions under which reforms succeed. He concludes that successful instructional reform is intensive and multi-dimensional, requiring clear academic standards; useful tools for monitoring students’ achievement; usable curriculum materials aligned to standards and tests; systems of professional development that provide teachers with intensive and explicit guidance about how to teach new materials; and close monitoring of instructional processes to ensure faithful implementation. Read the paper Download the Paper

Nora H. Sabelli (2008). Applying What We Know to Improve Teaching and Learning.

Sabelli asserts that a great deal is known about how mathematics and science should be taught effectively, yet the educational system lacks the capacity to disseminate that knowledge across classrooms and systems. She suggests that the solution lies in supporting large-scale implementation research about dissemination in the education sector; developing content that anticipates the science needs of this century; and using pedagogies that help all students acquire knowledge and skills to become scientifically literate. Sabelli argues that a new conceptual framework for science education is needed to encourage the development of “coherent educational experiences with diverse problems” that help students understand a complex and rapidly changing world. Read the paper Download the Paper

Hal Salzman (2007). Globalization Shifts in Human Capital and Innovation.

Salzman argues against the common wisdom on globalization, which aims to protect the United States’ “competitive advantage” by dominating technological innovation and industries at the “top of the value chain.” Rather, he believes that economic success will depend on “collaborative advantage,” the ability the U.S. to be a “strong node” in a network of nations that produce innovations. Salzman proposes that our educational system should aim to equip all adults with basic math, science, and technological skills and to prepare STEM graduates to work across cultural and disciplinary boundaries, have strong communication skills, and function well in teams. Read the paper Download the Paper

Heidi Schweingruber (2007). Key Ideas in Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8.

Drawing insight from the 2007 National Research Council report Taking Science to School, Schweingruber presents a framework for improving science teaching and learning by enhancing the system of science learning. A well-functioning system would incorporate rigorous curriculum, standards, and aligned assessments; strong teachers and leaders with deep knowledge of science; effective teacher professional development; and significant alignment between instructional practices and student learning outcomes. Read the paper Download the Paper

Widmeyer Research & Polling (2009). Attitudes toward Math and Science Education among American Students and Parents: Summary of Findings..

Drawing on a national survey and focus groups with students and parents in two urban areas, Widmeyer finds that today’s students do not appear to be hindered by a belief that math and science are unimportant. Additionally, they do not hold negative stereotypes about students who excel in those subjects. The study suggests that a more significant barrier is students’ perception that certain coursework (particularly beyond algebra and geometry) and that math- or science-related careers are “not for me.” Widmeyer recommends that the Commission seek to communicate to a broad universe of students that math and science are linked to things they care about, such as having career options and helping to solve specific global problems. Read the paper Download the Paper

Jason Zimba (2009). Five Areas of Core Science Knowledge: What Do We Mean by ‘STEM-capable?.

Zimba examines core areas of knowledge and competencies necessary for students to become STEM-capable. He describes five areas of core science knowledge that all students should have an opportunity to learn: where we are in the universe; how we came to be; the organizing principles of contemporary science; human health and well-being; and, what science and technology can do today. Zimba also enumerates eleven fundamental science practices that all students should have a chance to develop: making and using mathematical models; connecting domains of knowledge; approaching complex problems; learning to look; designing and conducting experiments; presenting data for a purpose; crafting, critiquing, and debating causal explanations; thinking with your hands and on your feet; writing up results; criticizing, defending, and conceding; and modifying beliefs based on new evidence. Read the paper Download the Paper