![]() It also indicates areas where additional research is needed in order to develop appropriate measures. Indicators for Monitoring Undergraduate STEM Education outlines a framework and a set of indicators that document the status and quality of undergraduate STEM education at the national level over multiple years. At present, however, policymakers and the public do not know whether these various initiatives are accomplishing their goals and leading to nationwide improvement in undergraduate STEM education. Some focus on the national level, others involve multi-institution collaborations, and others take place on individual campuses. Many initiatives are now underway to improve the quality of undergraduate STEM teaching and learning. Improving undergraduate STEM education to address these weaknesses is a national imperative. However, many capable students intending to major in STEM later switch to another field or drop out of higher education altogether, partly because of documented weaknesses in STEM teaching, learning and student supports. Undergraduate STEM education prepares the STEM professionals of today and those of tomorrow, while also helping all students develop knowledge and skills they can draw on in a variety of occupations and as individual citizens. Ensuring a robust supply of these professionals is critical for sustaining growth and creating jobs growth at a time of intense global competition. “Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professionals generate a stream of scientific discoveries and technological innovations that fuel job creation and national economic growth. The first is entitled, “Indicators for Monitoring Undergraduate STEM Education.” The National Academies Press (NAP) recently (2018) published two reports of consensus studies concerning the delivery of STEM education and a framework for assessing the status and quality of that education. PISA 2015 provided strong evidence that students in many other nations are better prepared in science and math than their peers in the U.S. was ranked 40 thin math, 25 thin science, and 24 thin reading among 73 international educational systems. High School Student Performance,”the U.S. It’s ironic that today, more than 60 years after Sputnik 1 was launched, our nation’s educational system is still trying to figure out how to deliver science, technology, engineering and mathematics education, now under the popular banner “STEM” (or “STEAM”, so the Arts don’t feel left out).Īs I discussed in my 13 December 2016 post, “ The PISA 2015 Report Provides an Insightful International Comparison of U.S. was being challenged by the Soviet Union. A primary goal of NDEA was to help align the nation’s educational systems to better meet the nation’s security needs, particularly in the areas of science, engineering and mathematics, where the U.S. One reaction was the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) passed by Congress and signed by President Dwight Eisenhower on 2 September 1958. The launch of Sputnik 1, and the subsequent launches of Sputnik 2 on 4 October 1957 and Sputnik 3 on, prompted calls for more technical education in the U.S. See my 4 October 2017 post discussing the 60th anniversary of this event. Sputnik 1 was launched on 4 October 1957 by the Soviet Union and became the first man-made object to be placed into Earth orbit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |