4
Proposed Demonstration Program

This final chapter turns to the design of a demonstration program for new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering. The committee’s proposed demonstration program is based on what was learned from Phase I of this project about the attitudes of the candidates for this program (see Appendix A), on the discussion in Chapter 3 of what prospective teachers need to know, on a few related programs that have been launched in recent years, and on the committee members’ judgment and experience.

This demonstration program is not proposed as a step on the path to the solution to the current and expected continuing shortage of highly qualified teachers in science, mathematics, and technology in K-12 classrooms. Rather, it is offered as one potential contribution toward a broad approach to improving the quality of K-12 education in these subjects (see Appendix D for a description of some related programs). And it is also offered to generate an option for new and recent PhDs who may find the challenges and rewards of K-12 teaching more attractive than more traditional academic or industrial careers.

The overarching goals of the proposed demonstration program are to work out ways of preparing new and recent PhDs to become certified K-12 teachers, so that they can use their unique set of skills to significantly improve and transform K-12 teaching and learning in science, mathematics, and technology. By marrying the attributes of PhDs with the pedagogical and other teaching skills they acquire in the program, the nation will gain a



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology 4 Proposed Demonstration Program This final chapter turns to the design of a demonstration program for new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering. The committee’s proposed demonstration program is based on what was learned from Phase I of this project about the attitudes of the candidates for this program (see Appendix A), on the discussion in Chapter 3 of what prospective teachers need to know, on a few related programs that have been launched in recent years, and on the committee members’ judgment and experience. This demonstration program is not proposed as a step on the path to the solution to the current and expected continuing shortage of highly qualified teachers in science, mathematics, and technology in K-12 classrooms. Rather, it is offered as one potential contribution toward a broad approach to improving the quality of K-12 education in these subjects (see Appendix D for a description of some related programs). And it is also offered to generate an option for new and recent PhDs who may find the challenges and rewards of K-12 teaching more attractive than more traditional academic or industrial careers. The overarching goals of the proposed demonstration program are to work out ways of preparing new and recent PhDs to become certified K-12 teachers, so that they can use their unique set of skills to significantly improve and transform K-12 teaching and learning in science, mathematics, and technology. By marrying the attributes of PhDs with the pedagogical and other teaching skills they acquire in the program, the nation will gain a

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology group of K-12 professionals who possess deep content knowledge, a mastery of inquiry and analytic skills, direct connections to current research and laboratories, an ability to engage students and K-12 teacher colleagues in original research, and knowledge of the culture of science. These professionals can serve as role models for students who might want to become scientists or engineers. Very importantly, they can bridge the very different cultures of science and the schools in a variety of ways. They have the potential to form broad connections between universities and school districts; to become leaders in science and education at the district, state, and national levels; and to be advocates for school systems to gain access to resources at museums, zoos, aquaria, industries, and universities. A key to the success of the demonstration program proposed in this report is designing it to be responsive to the needs and interests of the PhD fellows, to the institutions that will conduct the teacher education, and to the local communities in which they will ultimately work. The latter two groups must be responsible for the operation and administration of the preparation programs; they will also serve as a “home” for the fellows. Four features critical to the demonstration program are that it: is national in scope; is 2 years in length; provides financial and other support for participants; and is designed to provide the opportunity for the participants to obtain state teaching certification. The next section discusses these four program features; this will be followed by a discussion of other program features that will be important for the program’s success: recruitment, selection and placement, teacher preparation, and mentoring and leadership preparation. The final sections briefly discuss the demonstration program’s structure, funding, and evaluation, closing with a brief look at next steps. A NATIONAL 2-YEAR FELLOWSHIP A National Program We propose a demonstration program that is national in scope for four reasons: (1) the national needs in K-12 science, mathematics, and technology education; (2) the mobility of PhDs; (3) a desire to offer the maximum

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology range of choices and opportunities for the participants and schools; and (4) a belief that the issues and ideas embodied in this demonstration program deserve national attention. People with new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology are not evenly distributed among the states, and there are only a few places that might have enough of them to mount a viable demonstration program on their own. Fortunately, these people tend to be highly mobile. They are accustomed to looking for the best places to conduct their research or find employment without regard to state borders. Their mobility is demonstrated in a special tabulation from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients that was prepared for this study (see Table 4-1): 70 percent of science and mathematics PhDs who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents leave the state where they earned their degree immediately after graduation. That is, of the 518,408 U.S. citizens or residents who received PhDs in 1957-1999, only 30 percent stayed in the state in which they received their degrees for their first employment. Only a national program can truly respond to the interests of prospective fellows and offer a TABLE 4-1 Mobility of Mathematics and Science Doctorates After Graduation, 1957-1999 (U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents) State of PhD Stayed in State (number) Moved Out of State (number) Total (number) Stayed in State (percent) Alabama 1,387 2,556 3,943 35.2 Alaska 98 129 227 43.2 Arizona 1,574 5,303 6,877 22.9 Arkansas 309 1,081 1,390 22.2 California 29, 429 37,373 66,802 44.1 Colorado 3,139 7,129 10,268 30.6 Connecticut 1,682 7,098 8,780 19.2 Delaware 352 1,577 1,929 18.2 District of Columbia 1,875 5,260 7,135 26.3 Florida 3,451 8,630 12,081 28.6 Georgia 2,434 6,173 8,607 28.3 Hawaii 509 1,148 1,657 30.7 Idaho 210 698 908 23.1 Illinois 7,976 22,482 30,458 26.2 Indiana 2,559 14,000 16,559 15.5 Iowa 1,801 7,820 9,621 18.7

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology State of PhD Stayed in State (number) Moved Out of State (number) Total (number) Stayed in State (percent) Kansas 1,119 4,832 5,951 18.8 Kentucky 833 2,499 3,332 25.0 Louisiana 1,536 3,823 5,359 28.7 Maine 148 366 514 28.8 Maryland 3,623 8,288 11,911 30.4 Massachusetts 9,170 19,972 29,142 31.5 Michigan 5,339 16,031 21,370 25.0 Minnesota 2,656 7,062 9,718 27.3 Mississippi 705 2,182 2,887 24.4 Missouri 2,575 6,494 9,069 28.4 Montana 247 992 1,239 19.9 Nebraska 780 2,289 3,069 25.4 Nevada 145 386 531 27.3 New Hampshire 278 1,413 1,691 16.4 New Jersey 3,069 7,904 10,973 28.0 New Mexico 949 1,794 2,743 34.6 New York 19,888 34,016 53,904 36.9 North Carolina 4,157 10,439 14,596 28.5 North Dakota 241 927 1,168 20.6 Ohio 6,706 13,280 19,986 33.6 Oklahoma 1,443 4,164 5,607 25.7 Oregon 1,440 5,061 6,501 22.2 Pennsylvania 8,045 17,644 25,689 31.3 Rhode Island 628 2,999 3,627 17.3 South Carolina 895 2,522 3,417 26.2 South Dakota 101 450 551 18.3 Tennessee 2,207 5,446 7,653 28.8 Texas 9,634 16,233 25,867 37.2 Utah 1,472 4,205 5,677 25.9 Vermont 219 685 904 24.2 Virginia 2,473 6,967 9,440 26.2 Washington 2,763 7,598 10,361 26.7 West Virginia 330 1,251 1,581 20.9 Wisconsin 2,918 11,100 14,018 20.8 Wyoming 183 937 1,120 16.3 Total 157,700 360,708 518,408 30.4   SOURCE: Special tabulation from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients prepared for the committee by the Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, National Research Council.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology range of choices to the institutions and schools that will be part of the demonstration program. Program Duration The proposed demonstration program would allow flexibility in the design of the local preparation programs, with the following constraint: that the institutions that choose to participate in the program will provide standards-based teacher education programs that integrate a variety of classroom teaching experiences with coursework. The coursework would include educational theory and the results of empirical research on how children learn science and mathematics. The courses would be structured as graduate-level seminars or other approaches that are appropriate for PhD-level teacher candidates. These programs are likely to be undertaken by institutions as add-ons to existing traditional or nontraditional teacher education programs, though some might design new programs for the fellows. Since one goal of the demonstration program is to provide the opportunity for state certification, the institutions will need to provide appropriate courses or other resources that allow for the fellows to become certified to teach in one or more states. Each fellow will participate in a 2-year experience. One program might feature a full year of classroom-based study followed by a full year of school-based teaching, designed to lead to meeting qualifications for certification. Another program might decide its needs are better met by combining the classroom-based study and school-based teaching in the first year, and providing the fellows with opportunities to work in a wide variety of settings in the second year. Within the framework proposed by the committee, many other structures for the local programs would be possible. The institutions that choose to participate in this demonstration program will likely already have ongoing partnerships with local schools, school districts, or larger geographical educational entities. If not, they will need to develop them. These partners will provide the settings for the school portions of the program, and they would be expected to assign an appropriate master teacher to act as a mentor to each fellow. Teacher Preparation and Certification We have already discussed the kinds of knowledge that new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering need to master to become

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology effective K-12 teachers, and Appendix C describes some nontraditional teacher preparation programs. A more extensive source of information on the preparation required for effective teaching is a recent report of the NRC (2000b), which reviewed the research results and recommendations of professional organizations. As described in Chapter 3, as an addition to the deep content knowledge in their fields, the fellows need to develop both pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: that is, how to teach in general, and how to teach particular subjects. Thus, for example, they need to learn how to teach students of different ages, with different prior knowledge, and from different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds. They also need to learn about classroom management and the structure of K-12 education, with its national, state, and local dimensions. In the committee’s proposed demonstration program, this pedagogical knowledge would be gained in both classroom-based and school-based learning and teaching experiences. One question with which the committee wrestled is certification: What role, if any, should certification have in the program? There are two issues involved in this question: one concerns the locus for certification; the other concerns the possibility of careers other than teaching in K-12 education. On the first issue, some participants at the committee’s workshop suggested that the demonstration program might aim at setting certification standards at a national level. However, teacher certification has always been the purview of the states, and there was considerable doubt expressed by other participants that states would—or could, legally—let an outside body set certification requirements. Moreover, the requirements for certification are variable across the nation (see Feistritzer and Chester, 2000). Yet it is critically important that the fellows obtain certification if they are to teach in public schools. The committee believes that the appropriate way to deal with certification in the demonstration program is to require that the 2-year program include all of the courses and other activities that are necessary for fellows to obtain state certification, at least in the state in which their preparation takes place. On the second issue, some workshop participants questioned whether the demonstration program should require the courses and activities for certification, since not all positions in K-12 education require teaching certification. However, the committee believes that if the fellows are to become leaders in improving K-12 science, mathematics, and technology education—whether directly in the classroom or in some other capacity—

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology the certification experience will provide credibility for them to work effectively with teachers. The committee therefore strongly endorses the position that all fellows should achieve certification, and as noted above, that the institutions that prepare them should ensure that the fellows can meet certification requirements. However, actually obtaining certification should not be a requirement for remaining in the demonstration program or successfully “graduating.” The committee notes that experience with scientists and engineers from defense-related companies who prepared to become teachers under the Defense Reinvestment Initiative (see NRC, 1999a) shows that fellows who do not achieve certification during their 2 years in a program may become certified after the program is over. Support for the Fellows To make the demonstration program attractive to prospective participants, the committee proposes that it be structured as a 2-year postdoctoral fellowship. By the time they have completed their work, PhDs have invested a significant amount of their time and funds in their professional preparation, and virtually all of the options open to them involve being paid or financially supported in some way. It is not realistic to ask them to then undertake two additional years of preparation on their own for one of the options—to help improve the nation’s K-12 education—that may be as important to the nation as it is to the fellows. Moreover, the fellows will be providing significant labor to their home school district, particularly in the second year of the program, so in that year the stipend can be viewed as in large part a salary. The committee believes that the first-year stipend should be awarded as a prestigious national fellowship. The second-year support might be in the form of a position in a school district as a teacher or in some other supporting role in K-12 education, funded at least in part by the school, district, or other education institution that is “employing” the fellow. Having the institution contribute some or all of the support for the second-year stipend would also demonstrate their commitment to the project. We estimate that the fellowship will cost a total of about $56,000 per year per fellow, which will cover the recommended stipend of $35,000, plus health and related employee benefits, and travel funds. Travel funds are important so that the fellows can attend conferences and other gatherings to keep in touch with both their scientific and their teaching colleagues throughout the country.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology To estimate the cost, the committee first examined how stipend levels are set for postdoctoral awards in the AAAS Congressional Fellowship Program of the American Association for the Advance of Science (AAAS) and the Associateship Program of the National Research Council (NRC). In the AAAS program, the stipends are commensurate with the salaries for entry-level employees of the host institution who have similar job descriptions. For the NRC associateships, the host laboratories set the stipend levels; the program suggests that they use the federal government’s grade 11 step-1 salary level as a benchmark for setting the stipend levels, but they are free to set the level above or below that target. Based on the review of teacher salaries in New Jersey, North Carolina, Texas, California, and Washington presented in the Phase I report (NRC, 2000a), we estimate that the average annual salaries in those states for entry-level teachers at the secondary level who hold PhDs is about $35,000. A stipend at this level is close to the $37,128 per year salary that graduate students and postdoctoral fellows surveyed for the report would expect to receive as a secondary school teacher. Therefore, the stipend level suggested is not expected to be a major barrier in recruitment, especially in states with pay scales similar to those of the states reviewed in Phase I. To the base $35,000 per year stipend the committee adds an estimated $15,000 for benefits, $3,000 to cover relocation expenses, and $3,000 to cover travel, for an average total annual cost of about $56,000 per PhD. However, because the cost of living and pay scale for teachers and other educators is not uniform across the nation, a geographic variation in the level of the stipends might be used for the demonstration program. In addition to financial support, the support of mentors—most of whom will be master teachers—will be critical to the program. As discussed in Chapter 3, teaching is a challenging and demanding profession, and classroom experience is an indispensable part of a teacher’s learning. Some of that experience and learning can best be passed on from master teachers to novice teachers, which both makes learning proceed more rapidly and gives the new teachers more confidence in their ability to become high-quality teachers. OTHER PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS In addition to the key elements discussed above, several other features will need to be carefully designed in the program: recruitment, selection and placement, and teacher preparation.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology Recruitment An important first step in the proposed program is identifying and recruiting the target population, new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering. Many postdoctoral fellowship programs define “recent” to be within the last 5 years, and the committee believes that that time frame is appropriate for this program. Furthermore, the committee believes that doctoral students should be allowed to apply to the program if they have not completed their PhD at the time of application but will do so by the beginning of the program. That way, the PhDs can go immediately from their graduate studies to the fellowship program. The group that discussed recruitment at the committee’s public workshop believed the population of recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering is reasonably well defined, so that recruitment efforts can be targeted to the appropriate trade journals and organizations. Word of mouth is likely to be an important part of recruitment, particularly after the program begins, when current and former participants will be excellent resources for recruitment. Another subject that arose in the workshop discussion concerned possible tension between: (1) an intent of the program to address the shortage of highly qualified lead teachers and (2) the desire of some professionals in the field to strengthen the infrastructure of K-12 education in science, mathematics, and technology in other ways. This tension might be reflected in the recruitment process to the extent that some applicants might be more interested in other positions in K-12 education, such as resource specialists, and might not remain in teaching positions after the 2-year fellowship. The group’s discussion centered on PhDs who are particularly interested in teaching, but it concluded that other careers in K-12 education should not be excluded from consideration. National recruitment efforts might include program announcements through a variety of Internet-based listservs, a specialized website, an informational brochure, and advertisements in Science,1 Nature, Chronicle of 1   There is some anecdotal evidence to suggest the journal Science might be an effective recruitment medium. An alternative certification program for PhDs developed as a partnership between the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Montgomery County [Maryland] Public Schools (see Appendix C) was described very briefly in the letters section of the October 13, 2000, issue of the magazine. Although the program is intended only for PhDs who are already at NIH’s Bethesda campus, the letter generated a national response: 30 people made casual inquiries and 13 others sent in material that they hoped would give them entry into the program.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology Higher Education, and discipline-based journals. Scientific, mathematical, and engineering professional societies might also play a role in recruitment. One model might be the Science and Technology Policy Fellowships Program of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, 2002).2 In that program, AAAS recruits, selects, and funds two of its own fellows and runs an umbrella program for the fellows recruited, selected, and funded by about 30 other national scientific and engineering societies. Special recruiting efforts might be needed to ensure that the program is known to all groups. For example, participants at the committee’s workshop noted that there are mentoring networks in some minority communities that might be very valuable in recruiting for this program. It is most important, of course, that graduating PhDs be aware of the program and that it is well advertised within graduate school academic communities. Selection and Placement In addition to the criterion that prospective fellows must be new or recent PhDs in science, mathematics, or engineering, the program should, to the extent possible, identify PhDs who have a strong desire to have a career in K-12 education. Toward that goal, applicants should provide evidence of an interest in K-12 education. Evidence might include prior participation in formal K-12 activities (e.g., classroom teaching, classroom observation, tutoring, literacy or partnership programs, etc.) or informal K-12 activities (e.g., programs in aquaria, zoos, museums, environmental centers, etc.). Furthermore, given the particular shortage of highly qualified teachers in urban and rural school districts, applicants should demonstrate interest and desire in teaching all students—from a variety of socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds and from different levels of academic preparation and achievement. Although it is important to select fellows who have a demonstrated commitment to K-12 education, it must be kept in mind that PhD students often carry heavy burdens to complete their work, so that they may not have had significant amounts of time for other activities. The people 2   This program is open to people with PhDs or an equivalent degrees in the social, physical, or biological sciences, or who are engineers with a master’s degree and 3 years of post-degree professional experience. The 1-year fellowships, based in Washington, DC, are designed to provide participants with public policy learning experience and to bring technical backgrounds and external perspectives to decision making in the U.S. government.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology involved in the selection process will have to develop realistic and flexible requirements for the criterion of a commitment to K-12 education. Applicants might be asked to submit letters of recommendation and an essay that describes their ideas about teaching, their ideas for integrating scientific experiences into classroom teaching, and long-term career goals. The applicants might also be required to take the Gallup Teacher Perceiver (see Appendix E) or similar instrument to assess their interests and skills for classroom teaching. Selection should be through a peer review process: the evaluators should include master K-12 teachers, distinguished scientists, mathematicians, and engineers, and distinguished teacher educators. The selection process will depend on the detailed structure of the demonstration program. There are three basic selection and placement scenarios that the committee believes should be considered. In the first scenario, the institution of higher education that will provide the first year’s preparation and the local schools or schools districts would be responsible for selecting the fellows. This option may be attractive to the institutions and schools because it gives them complete control over which PhDs are accepted into their programs. But it has two potentially serious negative consequences: the selection criteria might vary significantly from site to site, and PhDs might find it difficult to know about or apply to what are in effect many different programs. In a second scenario, at the other end of a spectrum, the selection and placement of the fellows would be handled entirely by the national-level entity that administers the program. Such an arrangement might provide economies of scale, promote the use of uniform selection criteria, and allow applicants to apply for several different institutions or places. But it, too, has several serious negative consequences: the institutions and schools that are the key places for the preparation might well not be willing to give up their ability to select candidates for their own programs. The third scenario is a joint process that involves both a national entity and the local providers. In this case, the precise roles for each partner would need to be worked out at the beginning in the detailed design phase. One model for a joint selection and placement process is the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) for medical training. The applicants to graduate medical programs and the programs submit ranked lists of either their preferred programs (from applicants) or their preferred applicants (from programs) to the NRMP organization. When all of the rank lists are received by the NRMP, it compares the lists and undertakes a process to find the best matches (see Appendix F for a description of the matching process).

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology A second model is the selection and placement process used by the NRC Associateship Programs (see NRC, 2001b). One component of that program, for scientists and engineers who are less than 5 years past receiving their PhDs, places associates in 1- to 3-year research postdoctoral positions at federal facilities across the nation. The host laboratory sets the length of the postdoctoral appointment. Candidates for the associateship submit with their application materials a proposal for research with a specific adviser at one of the participating federal laboratories. Applicants may submit up to three applications for each review (there are three reviews per year). The proposal is first screened by the potential adviser, who indicates whether the candidate should be considered by the NRC in its formal review process. The NRC then convenes peer-review panels to rank order the research applications that have passed the screening by the advisers. The associateships are awarded to the applicants according to the rank order of their application compared with others for the same federal laboratory. A third possible model is the selection and placement process used by the nine AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellowships Programs. Although the selection process varies somewhat among programs, they all screen the applications through an informal peer-review mechanism involving former fellows. The peer-review process leads to an initial cut in the applicant pool. Selection committees of relevant experts who are familiar with the program and with science and technology policy then meet to determine which applicants are invited to Washington, DC, for interviews. In most programs, these committees meet again to determine which candidates are eligible to become fellows. The placement is decided through interviews between the fellows thus selected and the offices that have expressed an interest in hosting a fellow, and the AAAS assists the fellows in finding a suitable placement. Mentoring and Leadership Preparation If the fellows are to be effective teachers and leaders in K-12 education, they will need to be knowledgeable about and comfortable with this system’s customs and values. A key to this acculturation process—as well as a valuable teaching method—is through mentoring. This type of support can provide experience, advice, and feedback on everything from lesson plans and accommodating parents to understanding and working with boards of education or museum docents.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology Participants at the committee’s workshop identified three general types of mentoring that they suggested would be valuable to fellows: transitional mentoring, involving general issues common to all fellows in the program (e.g., understanding different value systems, acquiring pedagogical skills); navigational mentoring, involving day-to-day issues that are relevant to the fellows’ local environment (e.g., accessing local resources, dealing with the parent organization); and developmental mentoring, involving individual professional development (e.g., building a network of colleagues, developing leadership and classroom management skills). The participants were assuming that the demonstration program would have both national and local components and suggested that all partners have a role to play in providing mentoring. In particular, they thought that the national program should play the major role in providing transitional mentoring, the school district should provide navigational mentoring, and that other partners (e.g., universities, museums) should take the lead in providing developmental mentoring. They also indicated that it is most important for every fellow to have a mentor in the form of a master teacher who is on site every day and would be involved in all three levels of mentoring. The committee believes that the fellows should be expected to contribute to K-12 educational scholarship3 in ways that demonstrate a new kind of leadership in the classroom and help build the standards-based infrastructure. There are two distinct concepts denoted by the word “leadership.” In its hierarchical form, leadership is conferred upon people who occupy particular positions in an organization, such as school principals or university deans. Although it is anticipated that some of the fellows may ultimately occupy a variety of positions in the K-12 educational system, it is likely that others will remain in the classroom for their entire careers. The other form of leadership refers to the actions of a group of people working together to bring about change in a system toward common goals and 3   The PhDs might conduct research in the areas identified in Chapter 3 as being critical to their success as K-12 educators. The topics are pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogy, context and diversity, classroom management, and schooling.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology values (see, e.g., Astin and Astin, 2000). This is the type of leadership preparation that the committee believes should be part of the demonstration program—building on the unique skills that PhDs possess so that they may become effective leaders in improving standards-based K-12 science, mathematics, and technology education for all students. It would not be targeted at developing future school principals, school district superintendents, or other “leaders.” STRUCTURE Although the Phase I report of this project (NRC, 2000a) raised the possibility of state programs, the committee concludes that the proposed demonstration program should be a national one. As discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, both sides of the equation for which this program is designed—the needs in K-12 science, mathematics, and technology education, and the population of new and recent PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering—are national in scope. In order to offer the most opportunities to both fellows and schools, a national program is needed. The committee also reiterates its belief that the problem deserves national attention. Other reasons for a national program concern economies of scale. Recruitment, including advertising, selection, and placement are all functions that can be carried out more efficiently on a national basis. Applicants can apply to several different places for their preparation; institutions of higher education and schools can choose from a national pool. Having a national program also means that there will be enough people in the same program to make it possible to design an evaluation that can yield clear findings. The committee envisions a program with 30-60 fellowships available each year to sequential overlapping cohorts of PhDs for the duration of the demonstration program. The committee believes that 10 years is a reasonable length of time for this demonstration program—to determine if it really works, and at what cost. The committee is aware that it may be necessary to precede the demonstration program with a smaller initial program—say, 10-15 fellows for four years—to show that there is sufficient interest among PhDs and in the K-12 community to warrant the larger effort. There will have to be some kind of national structure to administer the program. That national structure may also serve as a convening mechanism for the fellows—perhaps holding yearly or more frequent meetings so

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology the fellows can share experiences and learn from each other, and engage in leadership activities. It may also be useful to have yearly meetings with others involved in the program, for example, the mentors. The detailed structure of the proposed program will have to be developed in the next phase of this project, with appropriate input from all the communities that will be involved in the effort: potential fellows, institutions of higher education, schools, and master teachers. FUNDING The major program expense will be the $56,000 per year that the committee estimates to be required to support each fellow (see above). To estimate the administrative costs of the program, the committee looked again at the AAAS fellowship programs, particularly the Congressional Fellowship Program, and at the NRC Associateship Program. In 2001, the overall operating costs for the AAAS program were about $2,900 per fellow plus $1,000-$3,000 per fellow for the selection process; in the NRC program, the costs for both program administration and selection were about $9,000 per associate (about 15-17 percent of the total costs). Neither program includes the type of national meeting that the committee believes should be considered for this program, so the overall costs are likely to be somewhat higher than the $5,000-$9,000 per person for the AAAS and NRC programs. The committee offers the figure of $11,000 as a rough estimate; a more refined estimate will need to be developed in the detailed program design. Assuming that the first-year stipend and all administrative costs would be supported at the national level, the cost for each fellow would be $67,000 for the first year (covering all costs) and $14,000 for the second year (travel and administrative costs). The committee believes that the school, school district, or state would cover the $35,000 stipend and $15,000 in benefits for the fellows in their second year, when they will be working in local settings. Thus, for a yearly cohort of 30 fellows the cost of the first year of the program would be a little more than $2 million; for a cohort of 60 fellows, a little more than $4 million. For the second and subsequent years, the national annual cost would be about $2,425,000 for 30 fellows per cohort and about $4,850,000 for 60 fellows per cohort. The committee expects that the institutions of higher education and local schools and school districts will incur some costs related to designing and conducting their parts of the fellowship program. However, it is diffi-

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology cult to estimate those costs because of the variety of ways those institutions might design programs and because they may have similar programs already in place, which would reduce the costs of adding this program. The committee is assuming that these partners in the demonstration program would contribute the necessary funding for their parts. The committee also has not included in its estimate the costs of program evaluation and administrative overhead. Although these costs could be significant, their magnitudes will depend upon the details of how the demonstration program is implemented in Phase III. At the committee’s workshop, participants suggested that support for the demonstration program might come from a mix of federal, state, school district, private foundation, and industry sources. For example, foundations might provide seed money or start-up money, while, as just noted, states or school districts would be expected to support some local components of the program. One possible source of funding for the fellows’ stipends might come through a sponsorship by professional societies, as is the case with the AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellowship Programs. Because the proposed program is a national one, federal support would likely be needed, and it would be appropriate, reflecting the national scope of the issues. Looking at similar programs supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), that agency might be a source of support for the demonstration program. Other federal agencies that have an important interest in the issues being addressed are the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Education. The three agencies, and perhaps others, might work in collaboration on this program, which cuts across areas of interest to all of them. EVALUATION Central to any demonstration program is its evaluation. The findings of studies of program evaluation make clear that an evaluation plan has to be developed and implemented with the implementation of a demonstration program itself: it cannot be tacked on later. An evaluation plan must also reflect the actual implementation of the program: it cannot reflect only the plan and design of the program. Thus, the evaluation plan for the committee’s proposed demonstration program must be designed as the details of the program are designed and then refined as the program is implemented.

OCR for page 26
Attracting PhDs to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Mathematics, and Technology The committee notes that several groups should be involved in the development of the evaluation plan to ensure that it is appropriate for the program and can be done. They include the institutions of higher education that will provide some preparation to the PhDs and the local schools or school districts that are the setting for the teaching parts of the program. Most important, an organization that has experience and proven competence in designing evaluation plans for K-12 educational programs should be involved. NEXT STEPS This report marks the conclusion of the second phase of a project to explore the possibilities and design of a demonstration program to attract PhDs in science, mathematics, and engineering to careers in K-12 education. The twin goals of this project are to offer a challenging career opportunity to new and recent PhDs and to tap their unique talents to improve the nation’s educational system. The first phase showed that significant numbers of PhDs would be interested in careers in K-12 education. This report considers how to simultaneously meet the needs and interests of the PhDs and the nation’s schools, and it specifies some of the design criteria for the demonstration program. The program the committee proposes—a national 2-year fellowship for new and recent PhDs—if carefully implemented and rigorously evaluated, will provide clear evidence of its benefits and costs and can, if the benefits outweigh the costs, guide the development of large-scale, long-term efforts in this area. It is clear that just having the distinguished fellowship is not sufficient. Careful implementation will involve strong connections with participating local schools and districts, as well as strong and appropriate programs at the participating institutions of higher education and continuing contacts among the fellows. The proposed program carries the expectation that a new community of educators will develop among the fellows, who carry the cultures of both K-12 education and their disciplines, and so contribute to a high level of science, mathematics, and technology in K-12 education across the nation. The committee strongly endorses moving to Phase III of the project: calling together potential funders and program designers to implement the program.