STEM Legislation a Good First Step

Strengthening science, technology, engineering and math education is a priority issue on Capitol Hill and within the Bush Administration. Leaders on the Hill and within the Administration believe a greater focus on so-called “STEM” issues is necessary to maintain U.S. leadership in the global economy. The campaign was given great emphasis last year following publication of a report by the National Academies titled “Rising Above the Gathering Storm,” which argued that U.S. advantages in the marketplace and in science and technology have begun to erode.

Following the President’s announcement of his American Competitiveness Initiative in
2005, Congress began working on various ways to keep the U.S. competitive in the global market, with a specific focus on educating the next generation of research and technology leaders. H.R. 2272 is the first serious step Congress is taking towards achieving that goal.

On July 19, the Senate passed H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act, by a voice vote after inserting the text of S. 761, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (COMPETES) Act. The Senate passed S. 761 in April, a month before the House chose to combine various math and science proposals into one large omnibus bill (H.R. 2272). The bills will now head to conference, the first major step toward improving science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.

On Thursday, August 9, President Bush signed H.R. 2272 into law (Public Law 110-69), despite concerns that the bill “leaves some of the key priorities unfulfilled and authorizes unnecessary and duplicative programs.” The bill marks the first major step in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative, first introduced in his 2006 State of the Union. Despite a wide margin of bipartisan support, some Republicans in Congress greeted news of the president’s signing of the bill with skepticism and misgivings.

H.R. 2272 does the following:
• Authorizes spending $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.

ED is authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis for 3 years to state educational agencies (SEAs) for the purpose of awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) to carry out teacher assistance and professional development for teachers in elementary, middle and secondary schools. SEAs must submit separate applications for grants for: 1) elementary and middle school programs (K-9) and 2) secondary school programs.

The purpose of a significant portion of grants to SEAs is to hire private contractors who possess expertise in math to provide technical assistance and professional development for math teachers in high-risk, high achievement schools. Each SEA applying for a grant must submit an application to ED that includes a process to safeguard against conflicts of interest and a State peer review process for contractors applying to provide services.

Private contractors providing services under both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs must be required, by contract, to screen for conflicts of interest when hiring its employees. The law also requires that any contractor subcontracting must require its subcontractor to similarly screen for conflicts of interest. The minimum requirements of the screening process include a review of the following:

• Each individual performing duties under the contract or subcontract for connections to any State’s professional development and technical assistance program under this law;
• Each individual’s potential financial interests in, or other connection to, products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the program;
• Each individual’s connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensuring that individuals performing duties under the contract do not maintain significant financial interests in the products, activities, or services supported under the program.

The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive the screening requirements for individual contractors and subcontractors.

Any recipient approved for an America COMPETES Act grant or contract must submit a statement to the Secretary of ED, certifying that no funds derived from the grant or contract will be made available through a subcontract or in any other manner to another person who has a financial interest or other conflict of interest in the person awarded the grant or contract, unless the conflict is previously disclosed and approved in the process of entering into a contract or awarding a grant. Within 60 days of receipt of this certification, the Secretary must make all documents received that relate to the certification available to the public. This requirement applies to all recipients of funds under the America COMPETES Act, not only those funded by ED.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) criticized the bill for authorizing new programs without the necessary funds. Under the House Pay Go rules, any new funding must be offset, either through program cuts or raising taxes. Although Congress has authorized spending for these programs, actual spending levels are determined each year through the appropriations cycle. Therefore, it is not clear how much funding these new programs will actually receive.

Despite some Republican objections, the President joined a bipartisan group of Congressmen, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in applauding the steps H.R. 2272 takes in helping American stay competitive in the global market. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), a cosponsor of the bill, noted that, “by increasing our investment in basic research and the teaching of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, America is addressing the serious competitiveness challenges that it faces in today’s global economy.”

Resources:
John McArdle, “Bush Will Sign Competitiveness Bill Despite Some Misgivings,” Congress Now, August 9, 2007.
“Bush Signs Measure to Promote Competitiveness,” CQ Today, August 9, 2007.
Authors: CWP, SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

COMPETES Act Provides Conflict of Interest Safeguards

Congress recently passed the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (America COMPETES) Act. Passed as Public Law 110-69, the America COMPETES Act is a large omnibus piece of legislation, the law’s purpose is to invest in innovation through research and development in math and science as covered in previous Updates. The law provides a significant amount of funding to a number of federal agencies, including $33 billion over the next three years to the U.S. Department of Education (ED), to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance. ED is authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis for 3 years to state educational agencies (SEAs) for the purpose of awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) to carry out teacher assistance and professional development for teachers in elementary, middle and secondary schools. SEAs must submit separate applications for grants for: 1) elementary and middle school programs (K-9) and 2) secondary school programs.

A significant portion of grants to SEAs will be for the purpose of hiring private contractors who possess expertise in math to provide technical assistance and professional development for math teachers in high-risk, high achievement schools. Each SEA applying for a grant must submit an application to ED that includes a process to safeguard against conflicts of interest and a State peer review process for contractors applying to provide services.
Private contractors providing services under both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs must be required, by contract, to screen for conflicts of interest when hiring its employees. The law also requires that any contractor subcontracting must require its subcontractor to similarly screen for conflicts of interest. The minimum requirements of the screening process include a review of the following:
• Each individual performing duties under the contract or subcontract for connections to any State’s professional development and technical assistance program under this law;
• Each individual’s potential financial interests in, or other connection to, products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the program;
• Each individual’s connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensuring that individuals performing duties under the contract do not maintain significant financial interests in the products, activities, or services supported under the program.
The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive the screening requirements for individual contractors and subcontractors.
Any recipient approved for an America COMPETES Act grant or contract must submit a statement to the Secretary of ED, certifying that no funds derived from the grant or contract will be made available through a subcontract or in any other manner to another person who has a financial interest or other conflict of interest in the person awarded the grant or contract, unless the conflict is previously disclosed and approved in the process of entering into a contract or awarding a grant. Within 60 days of receipt of this certification, the Secretary must make all documents received that relate to the certification available to the public. This requirement applies to all recipients of funds under the America COMPETES Act, not only those funded by ED.
The Secretary of ED is required to establish peer review panels to review SEA applications (for both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs) and must consider the recommendation of these peer review panels in deciding whether to approve the applications. The Secretary is also required to establish a process through which individuals on the peer review panels to review SEA applications are themselves screened for potential conflicts of interest. The screening process must:
• Be reviewed and approved by ED’s Office of the General Counsel of the Department;
• Include, at a minimum, a review of each reviewer’s—
o Professional connection to any SEA’s program, including a disclosure of any connection to publishers, entities, private individuals, or organizations related to such SEA’s program;
o Potential financial interest in products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the programs; and
o Professional connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensure that reviewers do not maintain significant financial interests in products, activities, or services supported under the program.
The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive these screening requirements of review panel members. However, the Secretary must establish criteria for waivers and report any waivers allowed to the House Committee on Education and Labor and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP).
Author: CWP

Read More...

Summary only...

NCES Report On American Competitiveness

On Tuesday, August 14, the National Center for Education Statistics released a report comparing education systems in the United States to other “Group of 8 (G-8)” countries. Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2006 is intended to show how American education stacks up against other economically developed countries, as a sign of where the U.S. stands in global competitiveness. Just one week after the president signed H.R. 2272 into law (P.L. 110-69), this report helps to frame the debate on American Competitiveness by pinpointing how the country has fallen behind its competitors.

The report compares data gathered from three primary sources: the Indicators of National Education Systems (INES) project, conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); the 2003 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA 2003), also conducted by the OECD; and the 2003 trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS 2003), conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). These studies look at data in the U.S. as well as Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the other G-8 countries.
The data shows that, in many cases, the U.S. still leads other nations. At a time when the number of people seeking higher education outside their own borders has swelled to 2.7 million in 2004, the year examined in the NCES study, about two-thirds were enrolled in the G-8 countries. Of those students, 22% were enrolled in the United States, followed by 11% in the United Kingdom. However, given the large enrollment of American colleges and universities, the U.S. has one of the smallest proportions of foreigners in its mix of students, with foreign students making up just 3%. The United Kingdom leads this category with 16% of their total enrollment, with Canada, France and Germany also finishing ahead of the U.S. with 11%. The U.S. also continues to spend more money per capita on higher education (and education generally) than its European peers and Japan, spending a total of $24,100 per person on higher education and a total of $37,500 on education over all in 2003. Over all, the U.S. spends about 7% of its gross domestic product on education, with 2.9% going to higher education. None of the other countries that submitted budgetary information spent more than 1.4% of its GDP on higher education.
Statistics related to educational attainment, however, are where the U.S. begins to lag behind other G-8 nations. In the U.S., 39% of citizens in the 25-64 age group have a college degree, trailing both Canada (45%) and the Russian Federation (55%). Data regarding the number of Americans entering scientific disciplines also seemed somewhat disappointing, a fact that drove Congress to pass H.R. 2272, which authorizes funding for programs designed to recruit more effective math and science teachers. Only 17% of “first university degrees” awarded in the United States in 2004 were in science, mathematics and engineering related fields, putting the U.S. near the back of the pack compared other G-8 countries. The growing concern over American competitiveness finally pushed Congress into actions. Following the President’s 2006 State of the Union address, Congressional leaders began work on legislation that would encourage more young Americans to enter into career fields dealing with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), as well as recruit more qualified teachers in those same subjects. H.R. 2272, the America COMPETES Act, is intended for those very purposes. The bill:
• Authorizes $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.
Lawmakers are hoping that once the programs are fully implemented, future studies will show the U.S. leading in more categories regarding global competitiveness.
You can view a copy of the report at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007006.pdf.
Resources:
Doug Lederman, “Matching Up to the Group of 8,” Inside Higher Ed, August 15, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

President Bush Signs Competitiveness Bill into Law

On Thursday, August 9, President Bush signed H.R. 2272, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (America COMPETES) Act, despite concerns that the bill “leaves some of the key priorities unfulfilled and authorizes unnecessary and duplicative programs.” The bill marks the first major step in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative, first introduced in his 2006 State of the Union. Despite a wide margin of bipartisan support, some Republicans in Congress greeted news of the president’s signing of the bill with skepticism and misgivings.

H.R. 2272 does the following:
• Authorizes spending $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) criticized the bill for authorizing new programs without the necessary funds. Under the House Pay Go rules, any new funding must be offset, either through program cuts or raising taxes. Although Congress has authorized spending for these programs, actual spending levels are determined each year through the appropriations cycle, therefore it is not clear how much money these new programs will actually receive.
Despite some Republican objections, the President joined a bipartisan group of Congressmen, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in applauding the steps H.R. 2272 takes in helping American stay competitive in the global market. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), a cosponsor of the bill, noted that, “by increasing our investment in basic research and the teaching of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, America is addressing the serious competitiveness challenges that it faces in today’s global economy.”
Resources:
John McArdle, “Bush Will Sign Competitiveness Bill Despite Some Misgivings,” Congress Now, August 9, 2007.
“Bush Signs Measure to Promote Competitiveness,” CQ Today, August 9, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Congress Passes Competitiveness Conference Report

On Thursday, the House passed the conference report for H.R. 2272, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (America COMPETES) Act, by a vote of 367-57. Although the White House expressed concerns over the funding authorized in the bill, which conferees reported out on Tuesday, Congressional leaders expect President Bush to sign the omnibus legislation.

H.R. 2272 contains provisions from S. 761, H.R. 362, H.R. 363, H.R. 1068, H.R. 1867 and H.R. 1868, all of which passed through at least one chamber of Congress earlier this year. The omnibus package provides $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance. The bill also authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields. Additionally it supports federal research through the National Science Foundation, Energy Department and the National Institute on Standards and Technology.

Republicans criticized the “excessive” spending levels and the manner in which the Democratic leadership moved the report through both chambers. Normal Congressional proceedings require that a conference report be available for review for three legislative days before coming to the floor for a final vote. H.R. 2272’s conference report was available for fewer than 48 hours. That did not sit well with many Republican leaders. Despite those reservations, the bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and President Bush is expected to sign the bill.

Resources:
Jennifer Bendery, “House Approves Competitiveness Conference Report,” Congress Now, August 2, 2007.
Kathryn A. Wolfe, “House Completes Work on Math and Science ‘Competitiveness’ Measure,” CQ Today, August 2, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

House Committee Works on Coordination on STEM Education

House Democrats continue to advance their “Innovation Agenda." On Wednesday, the House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held a hearing on how to better coordinate federal science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) programs among agencies.

Witnesses at the hearing included:
• Dr. Cora Marrett, Assistant Director, Directorate for Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation;
• Dr. Joyce Winterton, Assistant Administrator, Office of Education, National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
• Dr. Bruce Fuchs, Director, Office of Science Education, National Institutes of Health; and
• Mr. William Valdez, Director, Office of Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists, Office of Science (SC-27), U.S. Department of Energy.
The subcommittee examined whether educators are utilizing information provided by federal agencies, if the federal government is creating effective and manageable programs for educators, whether there is a lack of a coordinated effort between agencies and whether federal programs are improving STEM education in America. The purpose was to assure that the recently passed STEM legislation could provide usable, effective tools for schools, educators and students.
Last month, the House passed the omnibus STEM bill, H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act. The package includes H.R. 362, H.R. 363, H.R. 1068, H.R. 1867 and H.R. 1868. Each of these bills previously passed the House by wide bipartisan margins. The reason an omnibus was rushed through the House is to present one bundled bill to conference with the Senate’s more comprehensive bill, S. 761, the America COMPETES Act.
The House package authorizes a total of $23.6 billion over fiscal years 2008 – 2010, including $21 billion for research and education programs at the National Science Foundation (NSF), $2.5 billion for the research labs, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and other activities at the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), and $96 million for early career awards and teacher professional development programs at the Department of Energy (DOE). An additional $70 million is authorized for these programs at DOE for fiscal years 2011-2012.
Resources:
House Committee on Science and Technology Press Releases:
“House Advances Major U.S. Competitiveness, Science/Math Education Package,” House Science and Technology Committee, Press Release, May 21 2007.
“Subcommittee Investigates How to Better Coordinate Federal Math and Science Programs,” House Science and Technology Committee, Press Release, June 6, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

House Passes Math and Science Omnibus Bill

On Monday, the House passed H.R. 2272, an omnibus bill that incorporates several bills focused on improving U.S. global competitiveness in math and science. The bill includes language from previously passed bills (H.R. 362, H.R. 363, H.R. 1867, H.R. 1868, H.R. 1068) and is now set to go to conference with S. 761, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (COMPETES) Act, which passed the Senate by vote of 88-8 on April 25.

The House bill reauthorizes the National Science Foundation (NSF) at $21 billion through fiscal 2010. The bill also reauthorizes the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the first time in more than a decade, at a total of $2.5 billion through fiscal 2010. The bill also authorizes $1.5 billion through fiscal 2012, including $664 million in scholarships for math and science majors who commit to teaching those subjects in “high-need” schools, and authorize federal grants through 2012 for early-career scientists and engineers at universities and other organizations. Congress has not set a conference time for the bill yet, but the White House has already spoken out against the “excessive” funding levels.
Congressional leaders have stated their intent to have the bill signed this year, but negotiations over the cost of the omnibus bill and a tightening legislative calendar threaten to undermine this promise.
Resources:
Kathryn A. Wolfe, “Proposed House Math-Science Omnibus Could Ease Conference With Senate,” CQ Today, May 18, 2007.
Kathryn A. Wolfe, “House Wraps Science, Math Bills Into Omnibus,” CQ Today, May 21, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Senate Leaders Push Competitiveness Measure

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) introduced S. 761, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (COMPETES) Act of 2007. This bill is the latest manifestation of the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI), which has been a Congressional buzz term since the President began the initiative in early 2006 in reaction to the National Academies report Rising Above the Gathering Storm. Despite the buzz, no bills have made any significant progress on Capitol Hill. However, S. 761 is unlike last year’s predecessors in that it is sponsored by both Democrat and Republican Senate leaders.



COMPETES looks at improving mathematics and science education. Senators said they hope to keep the United States competitive with China, India and other rapidly growing technological powers by authorizing more spending on a number of federal research and education programs. The bill would double the budget of the National Science Foundation, from $5.6 billion in fiscal year 2006 (FY06) to $11.2 billion by FY11. The bill would focus attention on elementary and secondary education programs by:

> Establishing new summer training programs for teachers at the National Laboratories and at the National Science Foundation;
> Assisting states in the development of specialty schools in math and science;
> Expanding Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs by increasing the number of teachers prepared to teach those courses; and
> Creating partnerships between the National Laboratories and high-need high schools to establish math and science centers.

A similar bill failed in the 109th Congress, but the party leaders in the Senate have pledged their full support to this effort and have promised to bring the bill to the Senate floor as early as next month. There does not appear to be any real opposition to the bill and Senators, such as Joseph I. Lieberman (I-CT), see the bill as the first of several efforts to boost competitiveness through federal attention to education. Additional steps will appear as the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind proceeds.

On the House side, Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-CA) has stated his intention to reinstate the "innovation agenda" he and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) introduced in 2005. Miller wants to increase the number of college graduates entering the technology and engineering fields by promoting his own math and science education agenda instead of the Bush administration's ACI. There is, however, no current House counterpart to S. 761 at this time.

Resources:
Jessica Brady, "Miller To Push His Own Competitiveness Plan Over Bush's," National Journal, February 20, 2007.
Michael Sandler, “Senators Push Bill Aimed at Math, Science Education Improvements,” CQ Today, March 6, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...