More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Linda Katehi

GET UPDATES FROM Linda Katehi
 

Breakthroughs In How We Teach Science

Posted: 08/01/11 04:17 PM ET

It's a well-known fact that America, long a technological leader, is in danger of falling behind much of the industrialized world because we have not kept up with educating our young people in the so-called STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math.

According to Charles Vest, President of the National Academy of Engineering, 21% of undergraduate degrees in Asia are in Engineering, compared with 11% in Europe and just 4% in the United States.

As an engineer and educator, I find that extremely troubling. But two developments give me hope that we could be turning a corner on this issue.

The most recent encouraging news is a comprehensive report just issued by the National Research Council that unveiled a framework for developing new standards in teaching science to K-12 students.

I was one of 18 educators and scientists on the NRC committee that prepared the report, which was released July 19. We heard testimony, reviewed the literature and talked to a wide range of experts as part of this process.

The K-12 science framework would not be part of a nationalized curriculum imposed on school districts across the nation. Each state would use the NRC framework it to develop its own standards.

But the real breakthrough here is that the report calls for teachers to use engineering as the principal medium to teach science. As an electrical engineer and university professor, I am convinced that engineering is the best way to teach science to kids. That's because engineering is tangible. It is not abstract.

Engineers design and build things. They use math, science and carefully observed trial and error to create products that are useful, that help solve problems.

Children learn in much the same way. Making things comes naturally to them. Their brains learn by doing. Just look at how youngsters play with Legos. They use hands-on trial and error to design a finished product.

We've tended to teach science by telling. But when you talk to young people about algorithms, extrapolation and optimization -- all tools of the scientist -- their eyes understandably glaze over.

When you can get them using their hands and brains to design something, suddenly the science inherent in the exercise starts to make sense.

The NRC report dovetails with efforts to promote STEM education in California that have the potential to make our state a national leader in this important area. It is an opportunity we must fully embrace.

The California STEM Learning Network was launched in 2008 with funding from the S.D. Bechtel Jr. Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Known as CSLNet, the Network has been pushing hard ever since for students -- including girls and minorities who are typically under-represented in the STEM fields -- to graduate from high school with the necessary STEM knowledge and skills needed to succeed in post-secondary education, work and life.

This is good for California and good for our students. STEM jobs are going to grow faster than jobs in other fields. They tend to pay more. With an economy increasingly built on innovation, it's essential that we train the next generation of innovators who will keep our economy growing.

After all, we are citizens of a society that depends extensively on technology. In addition to the crucial issue of our economic competitiveness, we need to understand science to make decisions that are in the best interest of our country and ourselves.

If California can do a better job promoting science literacy in the biggest, most innovative state in the nation, other states will follow our lead, as they have in so many other areas. And that would be an innovation that would be a boost for us all.

 
It's a well-known fact that America, long a technological leader, is in danger of falling behind much of the industrialized world because we have not kept up with educating our young people in the so-...
It's a well-known fact that America, long a technological leader, is in danger of falling behind much of the industrialized world because we have not kept up with educating our young people in the so-...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:31 AM on 08/06/2011
I would love to see kids in the United States to become more interested in science and engineering. I believe one main problem that restricts the nation's progress in having more students engaged in science and engineering has been the lack of science foundation in the students' early years. Without a strong foundation in science and mathematics, students are not likely to become interested in learning more about abstract or specific branch of science. Therefore, as some of the readers have commented, some students do not take AP chemistry/phyiscs/etc. because they find these subjects incomprehensible as they lack the foundation that allows them to understand the material.
Nevertheless, I hope that this new progress and learning objectives can ultimately help students to gain interest in learning science.
05:04 AM on 08/03/2011
Can't we just implement the Keller Plan already?
09:56 AM on 08/02/2011
Ms. Katehi - please visit http://modeling.asu.edu/ and write an article about this program. It is amazing and would compliment STEM. I went to a workshop this summer and as science teacher with 17 yrs of experience, this was a paradigm shifting experience for me. I can't wait to start this school year!
08:07 AM on 08/02/2011
The last time "scientists" got involved in science at the elementary school level was a disaster. Someone thought that scientists could write better textbooks for young children. These textbooks were unreadable and made very little sense. Unfortunately much of the hands-on materials that come with science programs only last for a year. These materials are quickly destroyed by students and too expensive to replace. Most elementary teachers are not given the time to prepare or teach science lessons beyond reading the textbook.
11:04 PM on 08/01/2011
I don't know how serious a problem it is today but I got NO SCIENCE in grade school whatsoever. I remember sitting in a class staring at pristine science books sitting on a shelf that were never used. But I stumbled across science fiction in 4th grade and today some of that stuff is FREE.

All Day September by Roger Kuykendall
http://www.feedbooks.com/book/2295/all-day-september

Omnilingual by Henry Beam Piper
http://www.feedbooks.com/book/308/omnilingual

Curiously enough of my interest in science stimulated as a result of reading science fiction was greater than any encouraged by science teachers I had when I finally got science classes in high school. Straight A's were easy but it was still formulaic. SF was more imaginative. I went to college for Electrical Engineering.

The finance people are wrecking the country. The schools should make double-entry accounting mandatory for everybody. Then the finance people might not do so well and the country would be better off.
photo
Angel1999
Microbiologist & Historian
03:41 PM on 08/02/2011
Umbrarchist, you just exactly described my own road to science. I remember in 3rd grade, we cracked open the science text book...on one single day out of the whole year. It was so novel that I remember that event, though I don't remember what we learned.

It was only when I discovered science fiction that I gained an interest in science.
09:36 PM on 08/02/2011
It is very curious that stories like ours are so easy to find and yet our so called educational system has not made an organized effort to encourage science fiction reading in grade schools. And yet there is all of this lip service given to science education.

But now some of that stuff is free on the net and $100 wireless tablets exist. It sounds like a recipe for a science education revolution to me. Maybe we just need for kids to ignore some of the educators. LOL

Eight Keys to Eden by Mark Clifton
http://www.onread.com/book/Eight-Keys-to-Eden-6514/
09:37 PM on 08/01/2011
I teach chemistry (including AP) at an upscale suburban school district. In my view, there is no shortage of talented, capable students. The problem is more systemic than that--there is little incentive to go into engineering or scientific research. The fields do not carry prestige or recognition outside their fields, and the salaries can't compete with fields such as medicine and finance, both of which also carry societal prestige and draw on the same talents. When we start making engineering and science as respected and competitive, then we will see more students choosing them.
10:00 AM on 08/02/2011
check out http://modeling.asu.edu/ - I teach AP chem and physics. This is a groundbreaking (and not new, much to my surprise) program, well researched :) Loved the workshop I went to and acutally am excited to start the school year again - after 17 years :)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
rtgmath
There has got to be a better way!
09:25 PM on 08/01/2011
If you look at the curriculum requirements at nearly any grade past grade 2, the amount of information students are required to learn far exceeds what could be gained by experimental play.

I agree that experimental play is much more effective at teaching certain concepts. And I agree that there must be better ways to teach science and math than are currently being used. But in our test and test and test again culture of failure, experimental play will result in better learning of concepts explored, but fewer concepts learned or dealt with than desired. Our No Child Left Behind culture will test these children as performing even lower than traditional students, and a great learning tool will be maligned.

We need a rethink of educational priorities. Do we continue with lots of stuff learned poorly, or do we want fewer things learned well?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Glackin
Time to clean House/Obama2012
09:56 PM on 08/01/2011
Do you learn more answering fact-based tests, or grasping concepts?
Does hands-on work better than the "lecture concept" of teaching?
And, finally, didn't we answer these questions 60 years ago?
Why are we re-inventing the wheel?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
rtgmath
There has got to be a better way!
10:21 PM on 08/01/2011
Every time good educators come up with better ways to teach, conservatives attack and pull us back to rote learning answering fact-based tests.

Well, unless it deals with the rewritten history and science that conservatives push instead of the real thing. Then we are sent to answering "sorta facty-based tests."

The culture wars are everywhere.
10:17 AM on 08/02/2011
There is! I just discovered it this summer:) visit http://modeling.asu.edu/ . This is a program that started 30 years ago, with loads of research. Mainly aimed at HS physics, but expanding. I have known that hands on is better, and Socratic discussion, etc... I attended a workshop and they show you exactly how to do it with researched materials. No dippy standards based textbooks designed by the politicians. This focuses on HOW to teach science, not the re-write of the what we teach once again. Bonus - kids still score well on the rat race tests.
07:27 PM on 08/01/2011
As a current engineering undergrad student, I appreciate your efforts to encourage more youngsters to pursue this course. However, engineering is nothing without math and science. Unfortunately, most of the people who I went to high school with were never interested in taking AP Calculus and AP Physics and AP Chemistry simply because a) they were too hard, b)only nerds took them, and c)why make the effort in having more homework and taking more tests when you can just party and not work hard. Until there is a more incentive to take the harder classes, students will not be motivated to take upper level math and science. Most are just content to do the bare minimum. The rigors of engineering school weed out most of those who enter, leaving only a small sliver of students in this field. I would like to suggest they they make the curriculum easier, but then the ones of us who stay wouldn't learn as much haha. I guess most people would rather take the easier route in life than get shafted by engineering.