[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
STEM EDUCATION: INDUSTRY AND PHILANTHROPIC INITIATIVES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13, 2013
__________
Serial No. 113-11
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
_____
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-930PDF WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair
DANA ROHRABACHER, California EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
RALPH M. HALL, Texas ZOE LOFGREN, California
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
Wisconsin DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ERIC SWALWELL, California
PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia DAN MAFFEI, New York
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
MO BROOKS, Alabama JOSEPH KENNEDY III, Massachusetts
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois SCOTT PETERS, California
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana DEREK KILMER, Washington
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas AMI BERA, California
BILL POSEY, Florida ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut
CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming MARC VEASEY, Texas
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona JULIA BROWNLEY, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky MARK TAKANO, California
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota VACANCY
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma
RANDY WEBER, Texas
CHRIS STEWART, Utah
VACANCY
------
Subcommittee on Research
HON. LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana, Chair
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
MO BROOKS, Alabama ZOE LOFGREN, California
STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas AMI BERA, California
CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
C O N T E N T S
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Larry Bucshon, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Research, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 6
Written Statement............................................ 7
Statement by Representative Daniel Lipinski, Ranking Minority
Member, Subcommittee on Research, Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 7
Written Statement............................................ 9
Statement by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Committee
on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 10
Written Statement............................................ 11
Witnesses:
Ms. Shelly Esque, President, Intel Foundation; Vice President,
Legal and Corporate Affairs; and Director, Corporate Affairs
Group, Intel Corporation
Oral Statement............................................... 12
Written Statement............................................ 15
Dr. Bob Smith, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer,
Engineering and Technology, Honeywell Aerospace
Oral Statement............................................... 26
Written Statement............................................ 28
Dr. Vince Bertram, President and Chief Executive Officer, Project
Lead the Way
Oral Statement............................................... 36
Written Statement............................................ 38
Ms. Andrea Ingram, Vice President of Education and Guest
Services, Museum of Science and Industry
Oral Statement............................................... 45
Written Statement............................................ 47
Discussion....................................................... 56
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Ms. Shelly Esque, President, Intel Foundation; Vice President,
Legal and Corporate Affairs; and Director, Corporate Affairs
Group, Intel Corporation....................................... 72
Dr. Bob Smith, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer,
Engineering and Technology, Honeywell Aerospace................ 74
Dr. Vince Bertram, President and Chief Executive Officer, Project
Lead the Way................................................... 76
STEM EDUCATION: INDUSTRY AND PHILANTHROPIC INITIATIVES
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13, 2013
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Research
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Larry
Bucshon [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bucshon. The Subcommittee on Research will come to
order. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to today's hearing
entitled ``STEM Education: Industry and Philanthropic
Initiatives.'' In front of you are packets containing the
written testimony, biographies, and truth-in-testimony
disclosures for today's witness panel.
I recognize myself for five minutes for an opening
statement.
Again, good morning. I want to welcome everyone to today's
Research Subcommittee hearing on the role of industry and
philanthropic efforts relating to science, technology,
engineering and math, or as we call it, STEM education.
As a cardiothoracic surgeon and father, I understand that
STEM programs and initiatives are very important. I believe
STEM education is an essential element in America's economic
growth and competitiveness. According to the National Science
Board's 2012 Science and Engineering Indicators, over the past
25 years the science and engineering workforce has more than
doubled in size and currently represents over four percent of
all U.S. jobs. And job losses from the 2007 to 2009 recession
have been relatively less severe for those in science and
engineering-related jobs compared to the rest of the U.S.
workforce.
The Federal Government spends over $3 billion per year
across 13 Federal agencies on STEM initiatives and projects. A
GAO report completed in January of 2012 concluded a need for a
strategic planning to better manage the overlap of Federal STEM
programs. GAO suggested the Office of Science and Technology
Policy should work with agencies and produce a government-wide
strategy for STEM initiatives that ensures efficiency and
eliminates duplication and ineffective programs. ``The America
COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010'' required the National
Science and Technology Council's Committee on STEM to develop
and implement a five-year STEM education strategic plan to
specify and prioritize annual and long-term objectives and
describe the role of each Federal agency supporting STEM
programs and activities.
My hope is that this strategic plan will benefit the
overall success of Federal STEM initiatives, education, and
development. However, as we consider Federal supports for STEM
education we must also recognize the importance of private
sector and non-profit collaborations to STEM education. As we
move forward with COMPETES reauthorization, we can draw on the
expertise of industry and philanthropic initiatives to ensure
taxpayer dollars are not duplicating efforts and are being used
in the most efficient and effective manner.
Our witnesses today offer the insight of their industry and
philanthropic contributions to STEM education. These
organizations work with students in K-12 education as well as
undergraduate and graduate students. They also work with STEM
teachers and mentors and offer tools for STEM classrooms. I
would like to thank all of our witnesses for their time and
offering us insight into the private sector-STEM relationship.
I look forward to hearing about your work.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bucshon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Subcommittee on Research Chairman Larry Bucshon
Good Morning. I want to welcome everyone to today's Research
Subcommittee hearing on the role of industry and philanthropic efforts
relating to science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM,
education.
As a cardiothoracic surgeon and father, I understand that STEM
programs and initiatives are important. I believe STEM education is an
essential element in America's economic growth and competitiveness.
According to the National Science Board's 2012 Science and Engineering
Indicators, over the past twenty-five years the science and engineering
workforce has more than doubled in size and currently represents over
four percent of all U.S. jobs. And job losses from the 2007 to 2009
recession have been relatively less severe for those in science and
engineering related jobs compared to the U.S. workforce overall.
The federal government spends over three billion dollars per year
across 13 federal agencies on STEM initiatives and projects. A GAO
report completed in January of 2012 concluded a need for strategic
planning to better manage the overlap of federal STEM programs. GAO
suggested the Office of Science and Technology Policy should work with
agencies and produce a government wide strategy for STEM initiatives
that ensures efficiency and eliminates duplication and ineffective
programs. ``The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010'' required
the National Science and Technology Council's Committee on STEM to
develop and implement a five-year STEM education strategic plan to
specify and prioritize annual and long-term objectives and describe the
role of each federal agency supporting STEM programs and activities.
My hope is that this strategic plan will benefit the overall
success of federal STEM initiatives, education and development.
However, as we consider federal support for STEM education we must also
recognize the importance of private sector and non-profit
collaborations to STEM education. As we move forward with COMPETES
reauthorization, we can draw on the expertise of industry and
philanthropic initiatives to ensure taxpayer dollars are not
duplicating efforts and are being used in the most efficient and
effective manner.
Our witnesses today offer the insight of their industry and
philanthropic contributions to STEM education. These organizations work
with students in K-12 education as well undergraduate and graduate
students, they also work with STEM teachers and mentors, and offer
tools for STEM classrooms. I would like to thank all of our witnesses
for their time and offering us insight into the private sector-STEM
relationship. I look forward to hearing about their work.
Chairman Bucshon. At this point I will now recognize the
Ranking Member, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, for
an opening statement.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, Chairman Bucshon. Keeping up your
reputation of the hardest-working Chairman in Washington with
our fourth hearing in four weeks, so very impressive. It is a
very important issue that we are dealing with today, and I want
to thank you and I want to thank Chairman Smith for pushing
this issue, bringing this issue forward because I think it is
one of the most important issues that we are facing today.
One of the reasons I joined this Committee is because of my
strong interest in working to improve STEM education. I have
also served as Co-Chair of the House STEM Ed Caucus for the
past four years, so I am glad that we are not only having this
hearing but having it early here in this Congress.
As a former engineer and with a wife who is an actuary with
a math major degree in math from college, I can personally
vouch for the importance of educating our students in the STEM
fields at all levels.
We are all familiar with the statistics by now. According
to the 2011 TIMSS study U.S. students in fourth grade rank
behind students in ten other countries in science aptitude and
15 other countries in math, and students fall further behind as
they proceed to high school. This has serious consequences for
individuals and for our Nation's economy.
For example, while we still face unacceptably high
unemployment, many employers are unable to find qualified
workers. I have heard from many manufacturers that they are
having a difficult time finding workers who have basic STEM
knowledge, and students who aren't learning the necessary
skills by the time they graduate high school are much less
likely to pursue STEM fields if they go to college,
constraining our workforce even further. And with fewer
Americans in STEM fields, especially fewer Ph.D.s, American
innovation is suffering, further hurting economic development.
We know that improving STEM education is complex problem
with no easy or one-size-fits-all solution. Therefore, we all
must work together: the private sector, non-profits, colleges
and universities, school districts, and local, state, and
Federal Governments to find solutions that fit specific needs.
If the U.S. wants to remain the global leader in innovation and
technology, we have to tackle these challenges with an all-
hands-on-deck approach.
Today's hearing focuses on corporate and non-profit
organization STEM initiatives. U.S. companies are realizing
more and more how critical it is to their long-term success
that we have a robust, high-tech workforce. Meanwhile,
foundations and other non-profits are increasingly leveraging
their resources and expertise in this area as the problems
grow.
I am very excited to see how much the private sector has
stepped forward on these issues in the last few years, and I
look forward to hearing about the efforts of the companies and
organizations represented here today.
One of those organizations is the Museum of Science and
Industry in Chicago. I have to say it was one of the places,
one of the most important places for helping to re-stoke my
interest in science and math and engineering and, you know,
really encouraged me to--when I was going to getting my
engineering degrees.
But today I also want to talk about the Federal role in
this partnership and in particular the role of the National
Science Foundation, which the Subcommittee has jurisdiction
over. NSF is one of the most important sources of funding for
education research. Industry rightly wants to put their money
into proven programs. For that to happen somebody has to
provide the funding to develop and prove out those programs.
NSF grants allow education researchers and organizations to
test out and evaluate new ideas and to improve our
understanding of how people learn and what effective pedagogy
means.
Much of what we know and use in STEM education today
started out with NSF funding. Unfortunately, our Federal
investments in STEM education, including at NSF, have stagnated
and are even being questioned. This is not a good strategy for
educating and training our next generation of STEM workers and
strengthening American competitiveness. We must continue to
address this challenge, so I hope this first hearing on STEM
education is one of many during this Congress and that future
hearings will look at the role of other stakeholders, including
the Federal Government.
U.S. researchers and universities which attract top-notch
students from many nations remain the best in the world;
however, we can't take this leadership for granted. As other
countries take bold steps to match and surpass our progress, we
must all work together so the U.S. remains the most innovative
country in the world.
I look forward to working with all my colleagues to ensure
that we are doing our part. I thank Chairman Bucshon again for
calling this hearing, the witnesses for taking the time to be
here, and I yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lipinski follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ranking Minority Member Daniel Lipinski
Thank you, Chairman Bucshon, and thank you to all of the witnesses
for being here today.
One of the reasons I joined this Committee is because of my strong
interest in working to improve STEM education. I have also served as
co-chair of the House STEM Education Caucus for the past four years, so
I'm glad we're having this hearing and that we are doing it early in
the new Congress. As a former engineer, I can personally vouch for the
importance of educating our students at all levels in STEM fields.
We're all familiar with the statistics by now. According to the
2011 TIMSS study, U.S. students in 4th grade rank behind students in 10
other countries in science aptitude and 15 other countries in math, and
students fall further behind as they proceed to high school. This has
serious consequences for individuals and for our nation's economy. For
example, while we still face unacceptably high unemployment, many
employers are unable to find qualified workers. I have heard from many
manufacturers that they are having a difficult time finding workers who
have basic STEM knowledge. And students who aren't learning the
necessary skills by the time they graduate high school are much less
likely to pursue STEM fields if they go to college, constraining our
workforce even further. And with fewer Americans in STEM fields,
especially fewer PhDs, American innovation is suffering, further
hurting economic development.
We know that improving STEM education is a complex problem with no
easy or one-size-fits-all solution. Therefore, we all must work
together--the private sector, nonprofits, colleges and universities,
school districts, and local, state, and federal governments--to find
solutions that fit specific needs. If the U.S. wants to remain the
global leader in innovation and technology, we have to tackle these
challenges with an ``all hands on deck'' approach.
Today's hearing focuses on corporate and nonprofit organization
STEM initiatives. U.S. companies are realizing more and more how
critical it is to their long-term success that we have a robust high-
tech workforce. Meanwhile, foundations and other nonprofits are
increasingly leveraging their resources and expertise in this area as
the problems grow. I'm very excited to see how much the private sector
has stepped up on these issues in the last few years, and I look
forward to hearing about the efforts of the companies and organizations
represented here today. But I also want to talk about the federal role
in this partnership and in particular, the role of the National Science
Foundation.
NSF is one of the most important sources of funding for education
research. Industry rightly wants to put their money into proven
programs. For that to happen, somebody has to provide the funding to
develop and prove out those programs. NSF grants allow education
researchers and organizations to test out and evaluate new ideas, and
to improve our understanding of how people learn and what effective
pedagogy really means. Much of what we know and use in STEM education
today started out with NSF funding.
Unfortunately, our Federal investments in STEM education, including
at NSF, have stagnated and are even being questioned. This is not a
good strategy for educating and training our next generation of STEM
workers and strengthening American competitiveness. We must continue to
address this challenge, so I hope this first hearing on STEM education
is one of many during this Congress, and that future hearings will look
at the role of other stakeholders, including the Federal Government.
U.S. researchers and universities--which attract top-notch students
from many nations--remain the best in the world. However, we can't take
this leadership for granted. As other countries take bold steps to
match and surpass our progress, we must all work together so that the
U.S. remains the most innovative country in the world. I look forward
to working with all my colleagues to ensure that we are doing our part.
I want to thank Chairman Bucshon again for calling this hearing,
and the witnesses as well for taking the time to offer their insights
today. And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski.
The Chairman of the Full Committee is here with us today,
and I recognize him for five minutes for an opening statement.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciated your opening statement, and I also want to thank
the Ranking Member for his comments as well. I checked, and the
Ranking Member is correct. This is the most active Subcommittee
of the Science Committee, and it is likely the most active
Committee in all of Congress. So congratulations to you all.
However, now that that has been made public and knowing how
competitive the other Subcommittee Chairs are, they may try to
gain on you, but congratulations on the record.
Mr. Chairman, since our founding, American innovators have
played an important role in our Nation's growth and prosperity.
Some of the most prominent people in American history were also
our nation's greatest inventors.
From Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison to the Wright
brothers and Henry Ford, American inventors have led the world
in innovations for centuries.
But in order to achieve the innovations of tomorrow, we
must better educate American students today. We need to empower
students with the tools they need to succeed and ensure young
adults have the scientific and mathematic literacy to thrive in
a technology-based economy.
America lags behind other nations when it comes to science,
technology, engineering, and math education. American students
rank 23rd in math and 31st in science. This is not the record
of a great country, and it is not the record of a country that
expects to remain a world leader.
We have to invest in STEM education if we want to remain
globally competitive in the 21st century. Currently, the
Federal Government spends about $3 billion on STEM education
activities each year. These programs are found primarily in the
National Science Foundation and the Department of Education but
can be in every agency under this Committee's jurisdiction.
Our witnesses today represent organizations that have
identified the need to strengthen our workforce by investing in
STEM education. They are organizations that are working to
promote STEM education and inspire our next generation of
scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and leaders.
Today we will learn what is taking place outside of the
Federal Government so we can be sure we are not spending
taxpayer dollars on duplicative programs and that we are
effectively focusing the resources we do have.
A well-educated and trained STEM workforce undergirds our
future economic prosperity, but we have to capture and hold the
desire of our Nation's youth to study science and engineering
so they will want to pursue these careers. Mr. Chairman, I look
forward to the hearing about the STEM initiatives and look
forward to the comments of our witnesses as well and yield
back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith of Texas follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Lamar Smith
Since our founding, American innovators have played an important
role in our nation's growth and prosperity. Some of the most prominent
people in American history were also our nation's greatest inventors.
From Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison to the Wright brothers and
Henry Ford, American inventors have led the world in innovations for
centuries.
But in order to achieve the innovations of tomorrow, we must better
educate American students today. We need to empower students with the
tools they need to succeed and ensure young adults have the scientific
and mathematic literacy to thrive in a technology-based economy.
America lags behind other nations when it comes to science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. American
students rank 23rd in math and 31st in science. This is not the record
of a great country. And it is not the record of a country that expects
to remain a world leader.
We have to invest in STEM education if we want to remain globally
competitive in the 21st Century. Currently, the federal government
spends about $3 billion dollars on STEM education activities each year.
These programs are found primarily at the National Science Foundation
and the Department of Education, but can be in every agency under this
Committee's jurisdiction.
Our witnesses today represent organizations that have identified
the need to strengthen our workforce by investing in STEM education.
They are organizations that are working to promote STEM education
and inspire our next generation of scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs
and leaders.
Today we will learn what is taking place outside of the federal
government so we can be sure we are not spending taxpayer dollars on
duplicative programs and that we are effectively focusing the resources
we do have.
A well-educated and trained STEM workforce undergirds our future
economic prosperity. But we have to capture and hold the desire of our
nation's youth to study science and engineering so they will want to
pursue these careers. I look forward to hearing about the STEM
initiatives our witnesses have taken.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If there are
Members who wish to submit additional opening statements, your
statements will be added to record at this point.
At this time I would like to introduce our witnesses.
Our first witness is Ms. Shelly Esque, the Vice President
of Legal and Corporate Affairs, Director of the Corporate
Affairs Group, and the President of the Intel Foundation at the
Intel Corporation. Prior to being at Intel Ms. Esque served as
Public Affairs Director for the Clerk of the Superior Court in
Maricopa County, Arizona. She received her Bachelor's Degree in
communications from Arizona State University's College of
Public Programs.
Our next witness is Dr. Bob Smith, the Vice President and
Chief Technology Officer of Engineering and Technology at
Honeywell Aerospace. Dr. Smith is a Fellow of the Royal
Aeronautic Society, Associate Fellow of the American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and current President of the
International Society of Air-Breathing Engines, whatever that
means. Versus non-air-breathing engines. In addition, he has
received the SAE Aerospace Engineering Leadership Award and
NASA's Silver Snoopy and Spaceflight Awareness Awards. He has
advanced degrees in engineering and applied mathematics from
Brown University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Sloan School of Management, as well as a doctorate in aerospace
engineering from the University of Texas.
Our third witness is Dr. Vince Bertram from Indiana, where
I am from. The President and Chief Executive Officer of Project
Lead the Way. Prior to joining Project Lead the Way Dr. Bertram
was Superintendent of the Evansville Vanderburgh School
Corporation in my district, and in 2010, Governor Mitch Daniels
named Dr. Bertram a distinguish Hoosier, one of Indiana's
highest awards. Dr. Bertram earned his Doctorate, Specialist,
Master, and Bachelor degrees from Ball State University, a
Master's in Education and Policy Management from Harvard
University, an Executive Certificate in Strategy and Innovation
from the MIT Sloan School of Management, and is an alumnus of
the Chicago Management Institute at the University of Chicago's
Booth School of Business. Welcome. I hope I got that right.
Our fourth and final witness is Ms. Andrea Ingram, the Vice
President of Education and Guest Services at the Museum of
Science and Industry in Chicago, and I grew up in Illinois, so
your coal mine exhibit was something I saw when I was a kid. My
dad was a coalminer. Prior to joining the museum, Ms. Ingram
has been active in a variety of public and private
organizations focused on children's causes. Ms. Ingram holds a
JD from the University of California, Davis and a BA in Justice
from the American University here in Washington, DC. She is
licensed to practice law both in Illinois and California.
Welcome to all of our witnesses. It is great to have you
here.
I will just remind you about the testimony. Our witnesses
should know spoken testimony is limited to five minutes after
which the Members of the Committee will have five minutes each
to ask questions.
I now recognize Ms. Esque to present her testimony.
TESTIMONY OF MS. SHELLY ESQUE, PRESIDENT,
INTEL FOUNDATION; VICE PRESIDENT,
LEGAL AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS;
AND DIRECTOR, CORPORATE AFFAIRS GROUP,
INTEL CORPORATION
Ms. Esque. Thank you, and good morning, Chairman Bucshon,
Representative Lipinski, and Members of the Committee. I really
appreciate this opportunity to speak about the importance of
STEM education to our Nation and to Intel Corporation. I am
Shelly Esque, Vice President of Intel Corporate Affairs and
President of the Intel Foundation.
Today I will focus on three topics: the importance of
highly-skilled workforce to Intel's technology development,
manufacturing, research, investment in the United States; the
role of STEM education in fostering innovation; and finally
Intel's education programs and partnerships to create the
workforce we need and to foster innovation.
Intel is the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer. We
employ 105,000 people worldwide. More than half of them,
53,000, are here in the United States, and at a time when the
Nation is calling for a revival of manufacturing, we are very
proud that Intel has invested three-quarters of our investments
in manufacturing and research in the United States.
Intel is an economic engine for the Nation, and the fuel
for that engine is our highly-skilled technical workforce. We
understand the importance of STEM skills because these are the
skills we seek each day as we hire the best and brightest
engineers and scientists. They design the technology of the
future, they run our factories, and conduct our research.
Through our education initiatives and investments, Intel is
helping to build community capacity for this pipeline of
workers and also preparing the next generation of innovators
and consumers.
Education has been Intel's primary philanthropic focus for
decades. I would like to share with you three of Intel's
programs to demonstrate our commitment to STEM.
First is the Intel Science Talent Search, which we
concluded last night here in Washington, which is why I don't
have a voice this morning. It is America's oldest and most
prestigious pre-college science competition. Alumni of Intel
STS have made extraordinary contributions to science including
seven Nobel Prizes, three National Medals of Science, and last
evening Ms. Sarah Bowles from Colorado Springs was selected to
receive the $100,000 grand prize. Her project focuses on
economic-viable algae, turning that into a biofuel, and she did
share with us last evening that she grows her algae under her
bed and sleeps on the schedule of the algae.
In addition, we have the International Science and
Engineering Fair. Intel ISEF is the world's largest pre-college
science competition, bringing together more than 1,500 young
scientists from 50 countries. Last year's winner of Intel ISEF,
Jack Andraka, from Crownsville, Maryland, was only 15 when he
discovered a new way to detect pancreatic cancer using a slip
of paper and a drop of blood. The implication of his research
on early detection of a variety of cancers is breathtaking, and
he is just getting started--just turned 16.
Our goal in supporting both these competitions is to
identify and celebrate talented young scientists, and through
them to inspire younger scientists to take the classes that
they need in K-12 and on so that they can successfully compete
and gain the visibility.
Intel does not just focus on talented students. We also
invest in teachers through programs like Intel Math. We
invested in Intel Math because studies show that elementary
teachers were often uncomfortable with the basic concepts of
math. This intensive training provides them the confidence in
the classroom setting, and a recent study of the impact showed
that teachers that went through the Intel Math Program, their
students scored significantly higher than other teachers'
students.
Over the past decade, Intel and the Intel Foundation have
invested more than a billion dollars to improve education
around the world. Our investments in education expand
opportunities for people like Sarah and Jack and for millions
more. At the core of our programs is our partnership in
advocacy. In order to deliver Intel Math, for example, we
partner with the University of Arizona and local school
districts to ensure we increase impact. The Society for Science
and the public here in Washington, DC, is our partner in Intel
ISEF and Intel STS, and Project Lead the Way is a significant
partner of ours in many states.
Another contribution we make to STEM is promoting skills of
our workforce. Our employees in the U.S. volunteered more than
235,000 hours in the classroom last year working with young
people around math, science, technology, and engineering.
In closing, I want to thank you for this opportunity. The
importance of STEM to our country cannot be overstated, and we
appreciate the chance to talk about it with you here today.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Esque follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you very much. I am going to let
the buzzers stop and then we will--I now recognize Dr. Smith
for five minutes to present his testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. BOB SMITH,
VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER,
ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, HONEYWELL AEROSPACE
Dr. Smith. Chairman Smith, Chairman Bucshon, Ranking Member
Lipinski, Members of the Subcommittee, good morning. My name is
Bob Smith, and I am the Vice President and Chief Technology
Officer for Honeywell Aerospace. Thank you for the opportunity
to be here today to discuss Honeywell's contribution to
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education.
American ingenuity has always been part of our Nation's
history. It is truly remarkable to reflect on all the
innovation that has come so quickly to this relatively young
Nation. While most of us are well aware of inventions like the
lightening rod, Morse Code, the light bulb, the airplane, the
Internet, we often overlook over innovations such as the
skyscraper, modern refrigeration, the phonograph, solar cell,
communication satellite, GPS, and of course, two Honeywell
favorites, the thermostat and the autopilot.
For more than two centuries American innovations have
changed the face of our world, creating new industries and
occupations, helping them turn technological dreams into
reality. At its core, innovation leads to new products and
processes that sustain our industries. Technological
innovation, which has become the foundation of the modern
expansion in broad-based prosperity and economic growth, is
fueled by brilliant minds that have a deep understanding of
math, science, and engineering.
America's global competitiveness increasingly depends on
our ability to educate our young people in math and science and
attract more of the world's best and brightest into
technological careers.
While strong, consistent, research-based policy will always
be the most vital element in advancing a national
competitiveness agenda, Honeywell has invested and remains
committed to supporting the growth in STEM education in several
ways.
It starts with our Honeywell Hometown Solutions efforts.
Building on a century-long tradition of corporate citizenship,
Honeywell Hometown Solutions has become one of the most
recognized corporate citizenship initiatives in the world.
Alongside leading public and non-profit institutions, our
Hometown Solutions Program addresses five important areas: math
and science education; family safety and security; housing and
shelter; habitat and conservation; and humanitarian relief. It
is that first pillar, STEM education, that gets me personally
and professionally excited about what can and should be done.
Honeywell promotes STEM at all educational levels and
across the world through three main programs: our FMA Live!
Program; the Honeywell Educators at Space Academy; and the
Honeywell Leadership Challenge Academy.
One program, FMA Live!, is an award-winning hip hop science
education program designed to inspire middle school students to
pursue studies in STEM. FMA Live! delivers a solid science
foundation supporting the learning objectives of National
Science Education Standards for grades five through eight. It
helps students learn that science is the key to understanding
the world around them.
Continuing our support of STEM education, Honeywell
developed the Educators at Space Academy, targeted for middle
school math and science teachers in conjunction with the U.S.
Space and Rocket Center. The program allows teachers to
participate in 45 hours of classroom, laboratory, and training
activities focused specifically on science and space
exploration.
Another program created in partnership with the U.S. Space
and Rocket Center is the Leadership Challenge Academy. The
academy is designed to encourage high school students of
Honeywell employees to pursue math and science throughout their
secondary education.
In all, Honeywell science and math education programs have
helped inspire more than 300,000 next generation scientists and
engineers, one student at a time.
Our initiatives are designed to nurture skills and talents
in a cross-functional way in order to develop innovative, high-
value, high technology products and solutions. We pursue this
effort with a relentless passion and a focus to help bring
ever-greater levels of safety, capability, and efficiency to
the world.
In April, I plan to return to Washington, D.C., to support
the opening of the Time and Navigation Exhibit at the
Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum. Honeywell has
invested in this exhibit and provides some of the key
technologies on display. In this exhibit, visitors will be able
to explore how improvements in navigation in time have changed
our world. These innovations have given us a world where we
never have to be lost again if we have the right device with
us. They allow us to explore more creatively. It is an
important exhibit on an international scale. But the exhibit is
even more important to the discussion we are having today
because the United States has always been a leader in
navigation and has been in this past century.
Chairman Smith, Chairman Bucshon, Ranking Member Lipinski,
Members of the Subcommittee, we have an opportunity to reflect
on the environment, initiatives, and policies that created the
great inventions that we find in the Smithsonian.
Honeywell is committed to doing its part in educating and
supporting the students of today who will ultimately become the
innovators of tomorrow. We believe that supporting strong STEM
education is essential to our company's future.
Thank you for the invitation to speak to you today. I
appreciate your time and attention to this important topic.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Smith follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you.
I now recognize Dr. Bertram for five minutes to present his
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF DR. VINCE BERTRAM,
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
PROJECT LEAD THE WAY
Dr. Bertram. Thank you, Chairman Smith, Chairman Bucshon,
Ranking Member Lipinski, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank
you for the opportunity to be here.
Project Lead the Way is a mission-driven organization
focused on preparing students for this global economy. The
statistics we heard at the outset of this Committee meeting
could be described as nothing else other than a crisis in
America, and it is going to require all of us working together
to solve it. We are the leading provider of STEM education for
middle and high schools across the country. We are in all 50
states, including the District of Columbia, and in 2013, we
will be in another 5,000 middle and high schools, with over
500,000 students engaged in our program. In 2014, we will
introduce an elementary school program as well, providing K-12
solution, as well as introduction to computer science and
software engineering, along with our engineering and biomedical
science programs.
The thing about Project Lead the Way is, one is it is
scalable. We started with a vision in upstate New York of being
in 12 schools. Today we are in over 5,000 and with last year
over 20 percent growth. We are also for all students. We are in
all school types, from urban, suburban, public, public charter
schools, private, parochial, small and large schools, rural,
and as well as low income and affluent schools.
We are also a sustainable organization, one that is built
on strength and operational excellence so that we can continue
to advance this important mission across our Nation.
But our program is built on three key pillars. One is
providing world-class curriculum that is engaging for students
that is standards based, is aligned with industry and post-
secondary expectations. It is project-activity based. Most
importantly we teach kids how to think critically, how to
problem solve, and how to collaborate; the type of skills
required in the workplace.
We also train thousands of teachers. Last summer we trained
over 3,800 teachers across the United States at one of our 48
university affiliates such as Duke University, University of
Illinois, San Jose State University, and Milwaukee School of
Engineering and many others that engage with us in an
intentional effort not only to train teachers, but to engage
with our schools and with our students.
We have a national network of master teachers, over 400
teachers that train other teachers on how to teach STEM
education, how to teach in a project-based classroom, which is
a fundamental shift in the way teachers teach.
But the third pillar deals with this network. As I
mentioned, it is critically important that we collaborate, we
find ways to work together. No one is going to solve this
problem alone, and it is not going to be just in K-12 education
or higher education, but it is a seamless pipeline. So for us,
some examples. Such in California where NextEd in Sacramento is
really moving toward a statewide implementation of Project Lead
the Way. We have grown from five schools in the mid-2000s. Now
we are 400 schools, but it is because knowing NextEd's vision,
but also companies like Intel, who is helping grow and sustain
programs in California and across the Nation. We have a great
partner in Chevron, who is investing millions of dollars in
Project Lead the Way schools to provide this kind of
opportunity for students. Companies like Autodesk.
At the same time we have companies like Toyota, that is
using Project Lead the Way, recruiting our students into their
Advanced Manufacturing Technician Program. We had our first
cohort that graduated in their AMT Program in Georgetown,
Kentucky, last May, and all of our students did exceptionally
well and now have opportunities to work for Toyota. That is
rolling out into all their North American facilities,
recruiting PLTW students into an Advanced Manufacturing
Technician Program that will allow our students to earn
Associate Degrees and for some to go onto Baccalaureate
Degrees.
We also enjoy great support from the Aerospace Industries
Association, one program that is endorsed by AIA, but it is
companies like Boeing that provide great support across the
Nation, and Rolls Royce, and a great partner in Lockheed
Martin. Companies are absolutely committed to this work.
But most importantly PLTW works. It is a proven solution.
Robert Tai, a professor at the University of Virginia, wrote a
white paper recently capturing 30 studies that have been done
on Project Lead the Way over the last 15 years, and the
evidence is compelling. Our students outperform, they persist
in higher education, they aspire to go into STEM disciplines,
the exact type of educational program we need to help grow
America and improve our economy.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bertram follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you.
I now recognize Ms. Ingram for five minutes to present her
testimony.
TESTIMONY OF MS. ANDREA INGRAM,
VICE PRESIDENT OF EDUCATION AND GUEST SERVICES,
MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY
Ms. Ingram. Thank you, Chairman Smith, Chairman Bucshon,
and Ranking Member Lipinski and the other Members of the
Subcommittee. I am Vice President of the Museum of Science and
Industry, Andrea Ingram. It is my privilege to be here, and I
appreciate the invitation to speak about the impact of our
innovative science education programs and the work of non-
profit institutions like ours.
I don't have to restate that STEM is critically important.
It is critically important to our economy, to our well-being,
and our environment. Countries around the world are investing
in science education and innovation like never before. It is a
highly-competitive race for the future. In fact, delegations
from China and South Korea and other countries have been coming
to the Museum of Science and Industry to learn what we are
doing and why it is working. These countries recognize that the
race for the future will not be won by test scores. It will be
won by youth who are well positioned to lead our economies into
the future. Their often-stated goal is to incubate the next
STEM jobs. It is not to beat us on the international
benchmarks.
What we know and what 21st century learning skills require
and what the next generation science standards anticipate is
that critical thinking is key, creativity is a must, and the
art form of collaboration is the lynch pin. These are the
skills that are practiced every day at MSI and the 365 science
centers around the country serving your constituents. These
science centers like us are nimble and strategic in meeting the
needs of our local communities. We are the perfect nexus where
industry, civic institutions, parents, students, and schools
can come together to make sure our youth have what they need to
be well positioned to be our next generation of scientists and
innovators.
The Museum of Science and Industry is the largest science
center in the Western Hemisphere. We have the privilege of
hosting nearly one million, five hundred guests every year.
They get to explore our award-winning exhibitions and
participate in our live science experiences. Our vision is to
inspire and motivate these youth to achieve their full
potential in science, technology, medicine, and engineering,
and to do that we founded the M`useum's Center for Advancement
of Science Education to leverage the inspiration and engagement
of our world-class exhibitions. Through CASE we make real
science accessible in classrooms, in homes, and communities
where children live their lives every day.
At MSI, again, we have the privilege of hosting 35,000
children on field trips every year. These children get to do
science in our exhibitions. They participate in live science
activities, they dissect eyeballs, 25,000 go to fabulous
learning labs like Mission to Mars, a fabulous program funded
by NASA. At MSI we extend science even further. We support
science clubs in 72 community-based organizations. We work with
high school youth on content and communication skills. We
bridge them into college and careers.
At MSI we do science even more by supporting teachers doing
science in middle grades classrooms, teachers, 70 percent of
whom are in our middle grade schools, in our region without a
background in science. They need support in supporting their
children doing science. These teachers have earned graduate
credit, they have earned Master's Degrees and now we have them
in 25 percent of Chicago public schools.
We have received an enormous amount of support from
companies like Dover, ITW, Boeing, Tacada to name just a few.
They are important partners and contributors. We also have
received Federal funding for our STEM programs, and I urge this
Subcommittee to strongly support programs within NASA, NOAA,
and NSF, namely NASA's Competitive Grant for Science Museums
and Planetariums, NOAA's Environmental Science Literacy Grant
Program, NSF's Advancing Informal Science Learning Program. We
are able to leverage these funds to gain corporate commitment
because our corporate partners are smart. They know that these
organizations are competitively giving these funds, looking at
the landscape of programing and funding only the best. We are
able to raise $3 for every 1 for those programs but 20 for
every $1 for the museum itself.
These investments are improving science education. Our
economy depends on our ability to have our youth positioned to
be our next generation. Without the support of these important
Federal funds we will lose key resources to prepare that next
generation of innovators and scientist.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ingram follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you very much. I would like to
thank all of the witnesses for your testimony and remind
Members that the Committee rules limit questioning to five
minutes.
The Chair at this point will open the round of questions,
so I recognize myself for five minutes once I get to my
questions.
Dr. Bertram, I am fascinated by the Project Lead the Way's
activities, project and problem-based learning that focuses on
hands-on, real-world projects. Can you tell us why Project Lead
the Way has invested in this approach, and what are the
benefits of this approach over other traditional learning
methods?
Dr. Bertram. Yeah. Thank you. Inspire students. It engages
them in ways that traditional learning doesn't. You know,
students expect to enjoy working on projects and applying math
and science, and one solution that we have had to trying to
improve math is just to acquire more math, and the same way
that we have taught math. But in this program students actually
apply math and science.
One of the things that early on in our history was of
concern was that students would not take as much math and
science if they took Project Lead the Way as an elective
course. We have found over the last 15 years just the opposite.
Our students take more math and science because they finally
recognize these are tools to help solve problems, and they need
this relevancy in their program of study.
Chairman Bucshon. And also your--I am intrigued by the fact
that you are going to start going into elementary schools. Can
you kind of describe what you'll be doing at that level?
Dr. Bertram. Sure. It is going to be project-activity
based, and again, allowing students to apply math and science.
We are using touch technology, we are using apps, and it is
going to be for all grade levels, K through five, leading into
our middle school program at grade six. So we are excited about
it. We are piloting right now. We have a number of schools
across the country and tremendous interest in the elementary
program, and we are looking forward to rolling it out in 2014.
Chairman Bucshon. Dr. Smith, you talked about Honeywell
Educators at the Space Academy Program. Can you tell us more
about how you--the selection criteria for teachers to
participate in that program, and what are the goals, and how
are the results being measured and evaluated?
Dr. Smith. Yeah. I would be glad to. We are excited about
the program. Honeywell Educators at The Space Academy is a
nationwide program by which we get high school and middle
school teachers engaged in this through a nationwide selection
process. We evaluate their nomination forms and talk about how
do they actually inspire and what do they hope to get out of
the program.
So it is very much looking at how they are going to take
this experience and take it back to their classrooms. We have
trained over 1,700 in this five day program that we have at the
U.S. Space and Rocket Center. It is a classroom, 45 hours of
classroom experience as well as other leadership and
development training. So we give them tools to take back to
their classrooms, and I have to say that the feedback from the
teachers has been just exceptional. They come out of there
incredibly energized. They now understand how this applies to
their students and quite honestly they have a number that will
say things like, I am confident that I will have a student
someday that will walk on Mars, and now I have the tools by
which I can go inspire that student.
Chairman Bucshon. That is great. Thank you. Ms. Esque, can
you tell us more about the Intel-Involved Volunteer Program? I
think that sounds like a great thing. How did it get started,
and how many of your employees participate?
Ms. Esque. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Intel involves the way
we encourage employees to chase their passion into the
community, and the primary way they choose to do that is
through education because we have a highly-educated workforce.
They want to give back through the schools in their
communities.
What we do is provide them with curriculum, tools, science
experiments, hands-on learning that they can bring to the
classroom, and then we supplement their time by paying the
school directly for having the employee be there. So it is
really a win-win. The school can then use their money to buy
additional science kits or additional professional development
for the teachers, whatever they feel is the best use.
About 58 percent of Intel employees volunteer annually, and
we have exceeded over a million hours for the last five years
worldwide.
Chairman Bucshon. Great. Thank you all for those questions
being answered. I think it is fascinating how there are so many
people out there working on this particular issue. I am very
confident we are going to make progress.
I now yield to Mr. Lipinski for his questioning.
I will yield to Mr. Bera. He is going to go first.
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking
Member. Mr. Chairman, thank you for how active this Committee
is, and thank you for calling this. In fact, it is STEM
education and educating the next generation is probably one of
the most important things that we can do as a Nation.
I am also particularly pleased to see representatives from
Intel and Project Lead the Way, you know, on the panel today. I
am glad to hear you talk about NextEd and the importance and
the impact that you are having in Sacramento County with our
students and the important investments that Intel has made.
And, Ms. Ingram, as a former associate dean at U.C. Davis
Medical School I am glad to see an Aggie in the house.
You know, both Intel and Project Lead the Way have
dedicated enormous resources, time, and energy to making sure
our children and grandchildren lead the way in innovation and
invention in the 21st century. As Dr. Bertram has mentioned,
Project Lead the Way, which is managed by NextEd in our
community, has been transforming education with their
engineering and biomedical classrooms. I have had the chance to
see this firsthand a few weeks ago. I attended a breakfast
where students from Antelope High and Sacramento County shared
their projects and talked about how the innovation class
supported by Project Lead the Way and Intel helped unlock their
imagination.
In many ways it reminded of, you know, when I was in junior
high, and, you know, we had wood shop, we had metal shop. It
was applying what we were learning, you know, in our math
classes. You know, it may not have sounded like mathematics,
but you had to imagine a project. You had to put it on paper
and draft it out, and then you had to go about developing the
project, and far too often those are the classes that are
getting cut in our current testing base curricula.
Last night I had the chance to attend Intel's Science
Talent Search Awards Gala, and let me tell you, that event, it
really makes me optimistic about what the future looks like.
There were some incredibly talented young people there, but we
have to make sure we are producing more of these young
scientists and so forth.
You know, Project Lead the Way and Intel's Science Talent
Search are two great examples of how we can unlock the talent
for the next generation.
Dr. Bertram, my question is for you, what is it that is so
unique about Project Lead the Way that makes it an easy,
affordable, and sustainable source of STEM education for local
districts and school sites?
Dr. Bertram. I think the most important thing is it works,
and there is compelling evidence and years of evidence that,
you know, we produce students that are excited about math and
science, that do better in math and science, that aspire to
careers in STEM, and those are the things that we believe are
most compelling.
At the same time, you know, affordability is very important
for schools, and that is where we connect with companies all
over America to help provide funds for schools to start this
program and to sustain it, but we are constantly looking for
ways to reduce costs, and we are bringing partners to the table
to provide industry standard software for our schools, the
technology they need to deliver programs, as well as equipment
and other materials, and it is this collaboration, this
network, this expansive network of partners across the Nation
that we believe allow this to be scalable beyond where we are
at today.
Mr. Bera. Great, and Ms. Esque or Dr. Bertram or any of the
panelists actually, what can we do here in this body, in
Congress, to help foster more corporations and more innovative
programs like Project Lead the Way and this corporate public-
private partnership?
Ms. Esque. Thank you, Mr. Bera. I think the important thing
to do is to shine the light on what is working, and when there
is data behind the program that actually has dramatic results,
then I think more corporations are more likely to want to
invest in that, and by you highlighting that corporations are
trying to make a difference, I know that also encourages others
to step up and be a part of the solution.
Mr. Bera. Great. Thank you. I will yield back the rest of
my time. Thank you.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you very much. I now yield to
Chairman Smith.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would
like to address I think the same couple of questions to each of
our witnesses today, and my questions go to the GAO report that
looked at the over 200 Federal STEM programs, and it did so
with the idea of finding out whether there was any duplication
among these programs or not. And it found no duplication, but
it did find overlap. I am not sure what the difference is. It
seems to me overlap is partial duplication.
But in any case my questions are these. What do you all do
to avoid duplication with the Federal Government's over 200
STEM Programs, and what advice do you have for the Federal
Government to enable the Federal Government to avoid
duplication with your program? So if you would, look at it from
both sides, and Ms. Esque, if we could start with you.
Ms. Esque. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We also need to avoid
duplication with ourselves, so I would start there.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Goes all directions.
Ms. Esque. I think it is really important that the Federal
money is often used to seed or to do the research, to prove the
validity of the STEM Program, which provides a huge service to
the corporations that are hoping to invest. So I think what we
are looking for the Federal Government to do is do that seed
work, that research work, and then corporations and other
partners can come in and collaborate with what is been started
and to take it to scale.
And so I am not sure we have a good methodology for
ensuring we are not duplicating, but we do look for
opportunities where something has been proven or something has
been started but then needs to be taken to another level, which
helps us move forward.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you. Dr. Smith.
Dr. Smith. So the way we look at our STEM initiatives is
really around three areas. We try to inspire, educate, and
connect. In the first area, inspiring is something that I think
industry is somewhat uniquely able to go do in that it can show
the practical result of efforts being done at secondary and
elementary schools. Where does this all lead to? What do you
get to go do when you actually go apply this work? That
inspirational piece and being able to touch and understand what
is going to come out of a career in STEM can be very powerful.
Educating and connecting is also I think very important
because there is an area in which the practicality of what
happens in industry can be truly highlighted. So the project-
based discussions that have been discussed here earlier today I
think is a key element. There is more work that can be done in
terms of explaining the practicality of how engineering and
technology gets developed. Engineering and technology is a team
sport. It is rare that you are ever going to have a single
innovator doing everything that needs to get done to put
something into the marketplace. So understanding how teams
work, how a project works is a key element of what we do.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you. Dr. Bertram, how do we
avoid the overlap?
Dr. Bertram. Well, I think first as an organization we have
to remain focused on exactly what we do and be very clear about
what we do and not continue to move into other areas simply to
chase funds. I mean, that is a very important piece, and
oftentimes we get mission creep as a result of funding going in
different directions, and we are very careful not to do that.
And to be accountable to our funders and supporters.
The other is clearly one of the first questions we ask, as
we consider anything, is who can we partner with, you know, who
are other organizations in the space doing similar work, we can
come together, leverage resource, and do something together.
And finally, I think it is very important that we begin to
fund things that work, where there is evidence, clear evidence
that we are making a difference for America's children.
And one other point, I mentioned resources. As we raise
money from companies across America, 100 percent of those
dollars go to schools. We keep zero as an organization, and we
think that is a very important element, and it also generates a
lot of excitement and interest from our partners as well.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you, Dr. Bertram. Ms.
Ingram, you mentioned you had 100, 1.5 million visitors this
last year, which makes you I think second to Air and Space in
D.C. Is that right?
Ms. Ingram. Well, I don't know. I am not going to argue
with you, though.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Okay.
Ms. Ingram. That is probably correct, however, in the
science center land we are very large.
Chairman Smith of Texas. I understand and appreciate that.
Do you want to try to suggest how we might avoid that overlap?
Ms. Ingram. Well, I must say that I have not experienced a
great deal of overlap. There is about three Federal programs
that we are qualified to apply for: NSF, NOAA, and NASA. There
are content distinctions in those programs, so we do have a
NOAA grant now that allows us to do an earth science course for
our middle grade science teachers.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Good.
Ms. Ingram. We have a NASA grant that allows us to do a
fabulous learning lab for the students who come and join us on
field trips, and NSF we have had a lot of trouble getting money
for because they are very focused on research at this point
with universities rather than public engagement such as
exhibitions and some of the core work that we do to actually do
science.
So for us it is always about extending our strategic
priorities, looking for partners, corporate, civic, government,
wherever they may be, not to duplicate work but to address
unaddressed local needs.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you, and it seems to me it
would be fairly simple for the Federal Government to check the
nature of the grants and contracts they are issuing----
Ms. Ingram. Yes.
Chairman Smith of Texas. --and make sure that they are not
duplicative as well.
Ms. Ingram. Yes. They are very precise in that effort.
Chairman Smith of Texas. Thank you and thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Bucshon. I now yield to Mr. Lipinski for five
minutes.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I could go on
praising all of you for what you and your organizations are
doing. I know that--I think Dr. Smith put it well that their
goal is to inspire, educate, and connect, and I think the
inspiration part of it especially is critically important. So I
think all of you are--all of your organizations are providing a
great role. I know the Chairman talked about going to the
Museum of Science and Industry and the coal mine. I mean, when
I was a kid, that was the big thing, going to the coal mine
there, but so many of the exhibits there at the Museum really
did inspire me, and I think all the programs that all of you
have talked about are--serve as inspiration.
I have in my district something that is just starting. It
is in two school districts now, Lemont and Lockport, something
called Project Infinite Green, where they are, again, it is a
collaboration. I think that is very important. They have--Argon
National Lab is involved, CITGO is involved, Exelon Power
Company is involved in just bringing, in helping kids in middle
school to learn about energy, and they develop energy
solutions. I think a group came out here last year to talk
about what they had learned and sort of present what they see
as, you know, this is another way that we can produce green
efficient energy.
So I think that is all very important, what you are doing.
I thank you for doing that.
The--Chairman Smith had really focused on the Federal role
and not having that overlap. I don't know if there is anything
else that anyone wanted to add about the role that Federal
agencies are doing that are--in addition to anything that you
said, you know, either about direct funding, public-private
partnerships, collaborations, other support, or anything that
you see that they can do or can do better in this area. Is
there anything anyone wanted to add on that?
Dr. Smith.
Dr. Smith. I guess I would add one thing. In business, we
are always supporting many things to go develop our talent--and
that is largely what STEM education is about. It is providing
the resources, the capital, how do we get the training, all of
that. The government has a similar role. It just takes a
different form in terms of how those tools, resources, capital,
and et cetera get applied.
But I think one thing that we often miss in part of this
and something that we try and go do, and I think it is an area
that the government can do, is the concept of the leadership by
audacious ideas--putting out something that is really
challenging for the industry, challenging for science,
technology, engineering professionals. That could be an
incredibly powerful thing, and if you look at the history of
where we have had great advances in this country, it doesn't
take necessarily a moon shoot. Certainly a moon shoot inspired
me and another generation of people to get into this industry,
but things like ARPANET created the entire Internet. There is
many other ways.
So bringing that inspiration, bringing that leadership by
audacious ideas can be very, very powerful, and it would be
something that I would actually recommend that we spend some
more time thinking about as a country.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you. Dr. Bertram.
Dr. Bertram. Yeah. Thank you. There are two or three things
that I think are very important. Not only we focus on STEM but
we also need to look within the pipeline and the opportunities
that are in front of us that we are not taking advantage of.
For instance, the percentage of girls in STEM education and
specifically in engineering, the minority students, and you
know, I think the thing that creates fatigue in all this
discussion are all the excuses that we find for not engaging
certain types of students in this work, and there are all kinds
of examples.
I will give you one. Toppenish High School in Yakima,
Washington. A school with nearly 100 percent free and reduced
lunch, a school with over 90 percent minority population. Their
principal was just named National Principal of the Year. Their
test scores are going up exponentially, and it is a school with
over half their students in Project Lead the Way. These
students can do this work.
We have a school here, Davidson High School, in our
engineering program, and now it is over 40 percent girls. We
have all kinds of examples where people are breaking through
and not accepting excuses for low performance, and I think the
thing that we can continue to focus on is having high
expectations for all students and encouraging other students to
enter this pipeline.
One other thing is the public-private partnerships and the
opportunity for engagement, and really the insistence that we
work together in all sectors to bring urgency of this work, and
one final thing. We heard early on the active nature of this
Subcommittee, and I would suggest to you that it is critically
important that it continues to be highly active and continue to
focus on the urgency of this work across our Nation.
Thank you.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, and hopefully we will have--I want
to come to Ms. Ingram. Maybe if we have a second round we can
come back, possibly do that so--but I will yield back right
now.
Chairman Bucshon. The Chair yields to Mr. Brooks.
Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I have got a
comment for Dr. Smith. Very much appreciate Honeywell's
participation in the Honeywell Educators at Space Academy. My
kids have gone there. One of them was an instructor there for a
period of time before getting a teaching job in South Carolina,
and for you all to contribute sufficient funds to graduate over
200 teachers per year on average from the program there I think
is outstanding. Thank you doing what you do, and it is also
nice it happens to be in my district.
On a more serious subject, I am looking at the Chronicle of
Higher Education article, June 25, 2012, and I am going to read
a little from it before I ask a question for each of you to
ponder and respond to. It says, ``This year a report issued by
the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
on which we serve concluded that if the United States is to
maintain its historic preeminence in the STEM fields, science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics, and gain the social,
economic, and national security benefits that come with such
preeminence, then we must produce approximately one million
more workers in these fields over the next decade than we are
on track now to turn out. At first glance that may seem to be a
daunting task, but it doesn't have to be. At current rates
American colleges and universities will graduate about three
million STEM majors over the next decade, so an increase of one
million would require a whopping 33 percent increase.''
Using that number of three million over a decade, that
comes out to an average of about 300,000 STEM majors graduating
from universities each year, and I notice from the staff
Committee report it says that, ``the Administration's Fiscal
Year 2013 budget request proposed nearly $3 billion across the
Federal Government for STEM education.''
So, again, doing math, if we have got $3 billion, and we
have got 300,000 university students who are now majoring in
STEM, that comes out to $10,000 per student, and it occurred to
me that if we want to get that up to 400,000 graduates per
year, that would come out to $7,500 per student. Why not give
them scholarships as an incentive? If I am a parent and I find
out that my child can get an engineering degree or a science
degree or something like that and they are going to get a
scholarship award of $7,500 per student up to $10,000 per
student, as a parent I am going to say, son or daughter, this
is where you are headed.
Now, two of my sons are engineers as it is, so that is the
direction they went, mechanical engineering and aerospace
engineering, but what are your thoughts on eliminating a lot of
this Federal bureaucracy and taking that $3 billion and just
using it as a scholarship program, a monetary incentive for
these high schoolers to get that college education in the STEM
subjects?
Ms. Esque. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. I think it is one
wonderful idea, but let me speak a little bit about the
difficulty of graduating those students that enter the STEM
careers and to keep them in the pipeline. Between 40 and 50
percent of freshmen engineering and computer science students
will end up changing majors and dropping out of STEM.
Mr. Brooks. I did that. Economics and political science.
Ms. Esque. You turned out okay, though.
Mr. Brooks. Thank you, although the jury is still out.
Ms. Esque. But in order to retain them in the STEM fields I
think is where we will get a bigger bang for the buck. So once
they enter, they show the interest, how do we keep them there?
And what we know works is exactly what we know in K-12, hands-
on science. So we have been funding for many years a research
fellowship with the Semiconductor Research Association to
ensure that those undergraduate students get real time to do
real research with real scientists, and 97 percent of the 600
students that we have funded stay on, complete their STEM
degree, and half of those go on and get a Master's or Ph.D.
So it is not just getting them into the course room, into
the classroom, but it is keeping them interested and getting
them to graduate.
Mr. Brooks. Well, if they lose that 7,500 to $10,000 per-
year scholarship, don't you think that is an incentive for them
to continue to take those hard courses in science, technology,
engineering, and math?
Ms. Esque. Yes, sir, I do believe it is an incentive, but
if in the K-12 system they didn't receive the fundamental
training to be successful, the incentive may not be enough to
keep them there.
Mr. Brooks. And I see my time's running short, but if
anyone else would like to help share insight.
Dr. Bertram. Yeah. Quickly. Many of our college affiliates,
university affiliates offer scholarships and college
recognition, college credit advanced standing for our students,
and I would suggest it is a significant incentive for our
students, and it is something that intentional outreach where
they understand that there are resources available for them, it
is an incentive.
But the other thing to your question of really growing the
STEM pipeline, we find that--and these are studies that have
been done on PLTW over the last 15 years, that 92 percent of
our students pursue degrees, 70 percent pursue degrees in
engineering, technology, or computer science. We have 90
percent that when they graduate have a clear understanding of
where they are going and the confidence to go there. Milwaukee
School of Engineering, for example, found that their freshmen
to sophomore in the attrition that about 76 percent of their
students do not continue their declared major, where Project
Lead the Way students, they found 100 percent of their--our
students stay in the major they declare from freshmen to
sophomore year.
So our big challenge now is just to gain, provide greater
access to more students across this Nation.
Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If you all forgive me,
I have to depart for a Foreign Affairs Committee hearing that
began about seven minutes ago. Thank you.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you, Mr. Brooks.
I yield to Ms. Esty for five minutes.
Ms. Esty. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and again, this
is the hardest-working Committee because we love what we do,
and we care deeply as you do about the future of this country.
I wanted to touch on a couple of points. One as the mother
of three children, one who is doing astrophysics and someone
who grew up going to the Museum of Science and Industry as many
of us here were inspired to do, I think that is a sign, though,
of the importance of inspiring children.
So with all due respect it is not just keeping them in
school at the university level but having them even aspire to
that. So I wanted to explore both the question about women and
minorities and inclusiveness, which I think has got to start in
much younger grades. It is too late if you wait to university.
So that was one, and how we retain teachers, something that we
haven't talked about, but, again, I would just know from my own
experience seeing in public schools how incredibly difficult it
is to maintain really good math and science teachers because
they are lured elsewhere with a lot greater pay and the best
ones are in incredibly high demand. And if you don't have an
excellent teacher, it is going to be very hard to inspire
students.
So if you could all weigh in on that I would appreciate it.
Thank you.
Ms. Ingram. Thank you for the question. These questions all
begin and end with our children and whether or not, indeed,
they are inspired and motivated to participate in these fields
and whether or not they feel they are included and that science
and technology are for them. That formation in their
development starts really early, and although testing is not
the be all and end all, it is very reflective of this issue,
that in the U.S. if they are not doing well by the end of
middle grades, they are not going to continue on in STEM.
So the first strategy is to broaden the pool of potential
innovators and scientists to ensure that we are broadly
inclusive, that we are reaching them where they are with
concrete strategies, and I appreciate everybody's reflections
on their good feelings for the Museum of Science and Industry
and the science centers and their community, whether it is St.
Louis or San Francisco. But honestly, we go so far beyond
inspiration now. We are targeted to ensure that the youth we
encounter can achieve in the middle grades and achieve in high
school, and if they do not meet those steps, they will not
achieve in college.
What we know, what the research is quite clear about is
that college access, getting them to that point, getting them
to college is the critical barrier. If we can broaden and
diversify the pool of potential scientists and innovators with
our under-represented communities, including more women and
minorities, we know that if we can get them into college, they
are as likely and in fact, more likely to pursue STEM careers
and to stay in those STEM careers.
So for teachers we have to position them for success. High
school's a little bit different. You have to have a science
background to teach in high school. You do not in the middle
grades. So reflect on what I said at the beginning. If we do
not get them out of the middle grades successful, they will not
continue. Yet who do we have teaching in the middle grades?
Yes, we have some exceptional teachers, but we also have
upwards of 50 percent of our middle grade science teachers lack
a background in science. We will not be successful in getting
them to graduate from college with or without scholarships
until we address these fundamental problems earlier in their
educational careers.
Dr. Bertram. And I would concur. I think the thing
particularly with girls and really for all young people is
decisions are made at a very early age, second, third grade
whether they are good at math and science and what they are
going to pursue as they continue in education.
So I guess what we have to do is inspire them before we
expose them to low expectations and really move them through
this in a powerful way.
Also from a teacher perspective, what we are finding more
and more states are opening their teacher licensure program to
bring in more people into the field of teaching to allow
engineers and others to be trained to teach students, and more
people are interested in giving back and doing meaningful work
with our schools. One of the things we find in our teacher
training program is it is also very inspiring for teachers, you
know, to go through a pre-assessment and then spend two weeks
of intense training on one of our university campuses and then
the ongoing professional development. Many will say it is
transformational for their careers and really engages them in a
deep way and in a very different way.
Chairman Bucshon. Yield back? We are going to have a second
round of questioning for those interested, and I will start
that.
I recognize myself for five minutes.
We have talked a lot about students today, not a lot about
parents, and I would just like to see, just ask all of you your
perspective on how do we inspire parents to inspire their
students? Because when the student walks out of the school or
the classroom, we have to have further inspiration other than
what you are trying to do in my view.
Is there anything that we can or should be doing at that
level? Ms. Esque?
Ms. Esque. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One thing we feel
responsible for is educating our workforce as parents. So we do
engage parent groups, hold meetings around science and math
requirements, the core curriculum, and ensure that they have
access to all the tools and programs that Intel has available
as parents in the community.
Also I think it is--we work with a number of non-profits in
each of our large-site communities to work directly with
parents, to educate parents with teachers reaching out to them
and through community organizations bringing them up to speed
on what careers are like, because careers change so fast
especially in our industries that parents don't often even know
what is possible. So getting those employees out into the
classroom is a big part of that but also bringing the parents
in and sharing with them what we are trying to achieve.
Dr. Smith. Yeah. I guess the comments that I would make is
that parents are the larger determiner of how people do in
school. You can look at all the studies but at the end of the
day how a child will do at school and what they choose are
largely determined by how active their parents are and how
enthusiastic they are about a given area.
We have to look as a technical community, look at ourselves
as being responsible for some of the cultural problems that we
have in this area. We don't spend enough time talking about
what we do. We do incredibly exciting things, and we make it
incredibly dull at times. We just put, you know, a probe on
Mars, and it is taking pictures, and it is roving around Mars.
That is never happened before. We create things that have never
occurred, and we make it incredibly boring at times, and we use
a lot of jargon. I think that is our fault, and I think we need
to do more as a broad technical community, whether that is
government, whether that is non-profits, whether it is our
industries, in getting out and talking about what we actually
do and why that is important and why it is exciting.
Chairman Bucshon. Dr. Bertram?
Dr. Bertram. Parents play a critical role in this work, and
I think we have to continue to educate parents on the
opportunities for students. One great disservice I think we
have done for America's students is the belief that the only
way you can be successful is with a four-year college degree.
There are many career opportunities out there that employers
are looking for skilled workforce. It doesn't necessarily
require a four-year degree. We have to--but we have to help
people understand the opportunities available for them as well
as understand that education is affordable, and it is also
attainable. I think those are critical pieces, so what we are
trying to do is reach out directly to parents to help them
understand all the career opportunities available to their
students as well as the skills necessary for their students to
be successful.
Chairman Bucshon. Ms. Ingram?
Ms. Ingram. We have to be as strategic and thoughtful about
engaging parents and families as we are about their students.
We need to introduce them to the resources available, we need
to take them to the college campuses with their youth, we need
to invite them to the museums for family days, we need to
engage them in family night activities.
What happens in that household and the supports that are
there and the confidence of the families has everything to do
with whether or not the bridge to college is successful. So it
is critical that as we think about that student engagement that
we don't forget that a critical resource at home, the very
basic things that we can do about making sure all parents know
how to get in line for the resources and that all parents and
families have an opportunity to tap those resources and
leverage those opportunities for their kids.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you very much.
I yield now to Mr. Lipinski.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you. A couple of things I wanted to
mention. One thing is any programs that anyone, any of you are
doing, certainly I would encourage you to invite Members of
Congress local in their districts or out here in D.C., anything
that we can do to help, certainly we are interested in doing
that.
Dr. Bertram had just mentioned that there is some of
these--not everyone needs to get a four-year degree, and as a
former college professor I hate to admit that, but it certainly
is something--I mentioned in my opening statement, I go to
manufacturers in my districts who are looking for workers, and
they find that they--they are not looking necessarily for a
college degree but with the basic skills needed to do some of
these jobs in manufacturing, and they cannot find those
workers. And they either have to do their own remedial teaching
in order to get the workers they need. Sometimes they are just
forced to do that, and it is just a shame that we are not
producing students just coming out of high school that have
what they should have in the STEM fields.
I want to get to--go back to Ms. Ingram. You had mentioned
in your testimony, and you had also mentioned it here about
NSF's Advancing Informal Science Learning Program, and you had
said that, you had raised some concerns about it in your
written testimony and suggested that in some things that you
said here. So I just wanted you to expand on that, what you
are--what the importance of the AISL Program is and what some
of the concerns that you have or what is going on there right
now.
Ms. Ingram. Thank you. NSF has really taken a redirection
if you look at the list of awardees in recent years. It is
going heavier and heavier to university research projects, and
whereas all of us in the scientific field believe in research
and evaluation, we know, as I said before, what is going to
make a difference is impacting the people, the youth, the
programmatic experiences, the public engagement in exhibitions.
We have had NSF suggest that exhibitions do not have the STEM
structure to be relevant, and are, therefore, really not
getting the funding that they used to get. Some enormously
important exhibitions like ones that Honeywell has suggested
they are helping to fund and other major corporations view as
relevant in the progress towards STEM are no longer getting
access to those monies, and where we recognize that in a
constricted environment, people must make choices. If we were
focusing exclusively on researching programs and not doing
programs and supporting innovation and cutting-edge strategies
to reach where the children are and, indeed, not even providing
funding to the people who are working directly with the
children, then we are going to lose a critical part of that
innovation.
So, yes, we have asked, and we will continue to ask that
NSF reconsider its rational for altering the ISE Program and to
consider offering future solicitations that reemphasize the
importance of direct programming and delivering educational
experiences for students and teachers in public engagement.
Mr. Lipinski. Thank you. With that I will yield back.
Chairman Bucshon. Thank you. I now yield to Ms. Esty. Thank
you.
Ms. Esty. Thank you very much. We all recognize that we
face a shortage of workers trained in the STEM fields, but I
would like you to comment a little bit on the importance of
STEM training for those who don't enter the science fields and
if you can talk about what that important, the analytical
skills, the science background, risk assessment, all these
other skills that those who may, for example, become Members of
Congress and what--how we should be thinking about that and in
the greater value to having this grounding from elementary on
up.
Ms. Ingram. Thank you. I mean, look, fundamentally science
is about figuring out the world all around you, and if people
don't have the basic strategies that they need to understand
what is happening in their environments and to make choices for
their health and wellbeing and their environment, we are not
going to have a population that is advocating for the right
things, advocating for the right policies, and making the right
choices in their personal lives.
Having a basic scientific literate community is also really
critical to the other question that was raised about family
engagement. We all have to understand the role that science
plays in our lives, the role that engineering plays in our
lives in figuring out how to make sense of this world and how
to solve the problems that exist.
So it is very basic that if a child does not have a family
that understands the fundamental importance of having math and
science in their curriculum, it is going to be more difficult
for that child to achieve.
Dr. Bertram. When I think of high school engineering, we
are not training engineers. We are training critical thinkers,
problem solvers, students who understand how to collaborate,
work in a team environment. We are teaching computational
thinking, these critical skills that are transferable really to
any career, and I think to Ms. Ingram's point, is helping
students understand how the world operates, the world in which
they exist and which they have to compete.
For instance, I was with an art director on an airplane,
and she asked what I do, and I told her. She said, oh, you are
one of those. And as we got into a discussion, soon after we
reached 10,000 feet, she pulled out this huge Mac and started
doing this amazing work. I just out of curiosity, who do you
think developed that and how does that work?
It provides tools, musical instruments are engineered to
produce sound. Our students need to understand that, understand
how their world operates, and I think it makes for a much
better society overall.
We have a number of students that will go in different
career paths, but we believe that those students will be in a
much better position to contribute to our country.
Dr. Smith. I just emphasize some of the comments that have
already been made. Science, technology, engineering, math all
provide the foundation of critical thinking. It provides you
the structure by which you solve problems. That is a
transferable skill, and we see that when engineers go off into
other professions. It is very rare that you have someone that
comes from a different major and comes into engineering and
technology. That seems to be a one-way path for people in terms
of their careers. So I think that highlights why those skills
are so valuable on a broad scale basis.
The second point I would make is one that we live in a
technological world. Whether we like that or not, the idea of
an agrarian-based society is gone, and we are all surrounded by
technologies, and unless there is a clear understanding of how
those technologies work and how they are beneficial or how they
can actually be dangerous, I think we have a real risk of
having a competitiveness problem worldwide.
Ms. Esque. I would like to quote a 15 year old, if I may.
Jack Andraka mentioned after he won the ISEF last year that
within three seconds he can find the answer to just about any
common piece of knowledge on the Internet. What is important is
what does he do with that answer. What are the critical
thinking skills? What questions is he asking? What problems am
I trying to solve?
And he was urging the audience at that time to move away
from memorization and get to exactly what we have all been
talking about, the actual application in real-world situations
to solve problems, and that is how we inspire young people to
stay with STEM.
Ms. Esty. Thank you very much.
Chairman Bucshon. All right. Well, I would like to thank
all the witnesses for their valuable and very fascinating
testimony. Thank you for the thoughtfulness that you put behind
your testimony, all of you. And for the Members for their
questions.
The Members of the Committee may have additional questions
for you, and we will ask you to respond to those in writing.
The record will remain open for two weeks for additional
comments to written questions from Members.
At this point the witnesses are excused, and the hearing is
adjourned. Thank you, everyone.
[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]