STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Transformation for Student Success and Completion
Advertisements

Cultivating the Underrepresented Majority for STEM: Its Not Just About the Numbers Shirley M. Malcom.
If Youre Not There, You Cant Do It: Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D. Advancing Arguments for Diversity in the Sciences.
National Science BoardEHR Committee Diversifying STEM: Policy and Practice Derived from Standing Our Ground Shirley M. Malcom Daryl E. Chubin Jolene K.
Diversity in Graduate Education Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D.
Report to the KSD Board June 9, Provide Kent School District the necessary guidance and assistance to create an equitable, academically enriching,
Office of Academic Student Instructional Support -OASIS- -Cheri Tillman, Pat Burns.
Characteristics of Effective Schools Helen Raptis and Thomas Fleming Faculty of Education University of Victoria Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory.
OCCC AtD Meeting, September 16, 2009 Mr. Stuart Harvey 1.
Southern Regional Education Board WELCOME Strategy Work Session For What Should the Tech Center of the Future Look Like? Nancy Headrick, Director State.
Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
Foundations of Excellence ® in the First College Year Defining and Measuring Excellence in the Beginning College Experience Betsy O. Barefoot & John N.
FUTURE EDUCATORS 4-YEAR PROGRAM PLAN NJ Future Educators Association Conference May 15, 2009 Montclair State University Dr. Jennifer Robinson Executive.
Overcoming Barriers to Women in Organizing and Leadership Report to the AFL-CIO Executive Council March 2004.
Entering Students Have a Lot to Tell Us: Are We Listening? NISOD Monday, May 31, :15AM – 12:15PM Room 13A.
Broader Impacts: Meaningful Links between Research and Societal Benefits October 23, 2014 Martin Storksdieck I Center for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning.
SMC Academic Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Interdisciplinary Studies Report and Recommendation April 18, 2006.
Consequences of Changing the STEM Education Program We Shall Achieve.
Fostering STEM Diversity OPAS Vision for the Year All Oregonians have the opportunity to choose and successfully pursue engineering or applied science.
Broadening Participation for Greater Diversity Sarah Pritchard Associate General Counsel August 2012 Content is subject to change, as laws & regulations.
The Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education 2010 Survey of Pre-tenure Faculty.
1 Exploring NSF Funding Opportunities in DUE Tim Fossum Division of Undergraduate Education Vermont EPSCoR NSF Research Day May 6, 2008.
The Problem of Equity: Culture, Class, and School Essential Question: What is the Role of School in Society?
A New Look at an Old Challenge: Whither Diversity in STEM? Shirley M. Malcom.
Academic Development and Planning for College and Career Readiness K-12 CHAPTER 11.
Gaukhar Tuleuova, EducationUSA Adviser Aktobe Educational Advising Center May 19, 2011 Studying Engineering in the USA.
What Everyone Should Know About the Successful K–12 STEM Education Report.
Gender Equity in Computing Rita M. Powell Department Manager Dept. of Computer & Information Science.
College of Basic and Applied Sciences Advising/Retention Report.
Important Questions How do you define gender disparity? What is a gender disparity in education? How do you identify the gender disparity in education?
Creating Systemic and Sustainable Organizational Capacity for World-Class STEM Education The Leadership Challenge.
Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
ADVANCE PAID Program Office of Academic Personnel Setting the UC Context for Issues of the Double Bind Yolanda Moses Associate Vice Chancellor for Diversity,
2012 RFP Technical Assistance April 18, 2012 Oregon Title IIB – Math and Science Partnerships (MSP) Mark Freed Mathematics Education Specialist Oregon.
COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE SESSION STEM Education: Communication Tools and Collaboration Opportunities May 20, /20/11Superintendents Community of Practice.
1 Why should MSRI be involved in education, and how?
The Pathway to Success Expand the Diversity Found in the Composition of the Faculty and Staff at ISU Goal 6 – Initiative 4.
Bush School Diversity Report January 29, A General Comparison of Student Data.
STEM Faculty from Underrepresented Groups at MSI and TWI Institutions: are their lives different? Muriel Poston, Ph.D. Dean of the Faculty and Professor,
Leading Change. THE ROLE OF POLICY IN CHANGE Leading Change – The Role of Policy Drift to Quantitative Compliance- Behavior will focus on whatever is.
Frances Lawrenz and The Noyce evaluation team University of Minnesota 1 Acknowledgement: This project was funded by National Science Foundation (Grant#REC )
Ph. D. Completion and Attrition: Analysis of Baseline Data NSF AGEP Evaluation Capacity Meeting September 19, 2008 Robert Sowell Council of Graduate Schools.
APRIL 2014 Nevada Advanced Placement 2014 Report 1.
Developed by Yolanda S. George, AAAS Education & Human Resources Programs and Patricia Campbell, Campbell-Kibler Associates, Inc. With input from the AGEP.
WOMEN AND NETWORKING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON Denice Denton, Dean College of Engineering April 20, 2004.
Strategies for building community among students, and the impact of those strategies on STEM retention. Discussion topics include strategies aimed at critical.
NSF IGERT proposals Yang Zhao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Wayne State University.
West Sound STEM Network Working Together to Improve STEM Learning.
UW Faculty Retention Toolkit Joyce W. Yen, ADVANCE Program/Research Manager.
Illinois Community College BoardIllinois State Board of Education Programs of Study Self-Assessment: Starting the Journey on the Right Foot February 4,
LEARNING COMMUNITIES & COHORT BUILDING Strategies for building community among students, and the impact of those strategies on STEM retention. Discussion.
Women in Science & Engineering What Do We Know. Where Do We Go
EDUCATION CURRENT GENDER STATUS STEM Fields. NATIONAL EDUCATION TRENDS  About 20.1 million women have bachelor's degrees, compared to nearly 18.7 million.
NOVA Evaluation Report Presented by: Dr. Dennis Sunal.
ANNOOR ISLAMIC SCHOOL AdvancEd Survey PURPOSE AND DIRECTION.
NSF ADVANCE: Institutional Transformation for Faculty Diversity The University of Texas at El Paso April 2004 Evelyn Posey, Department of English Libby.
Student Success  What is it?  How can we assess it?  Whose responsibility is it?  What role do you play?
Past, Present, & Key to our Future. * In 1995 a survey was conducted across DE and it was found that the predominant form of Science Education was textbook.
UW Cross Department Cultural Change Program Joyce W. Yen, ADVANCE Program/Research Manager Chris Loving, ADVANCE Visiting Scholar.
ACS WASC/CDE Visiting Committee Final Presentation Panorama High School March
UTPA 2012: A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS-PAN AMERICAN Approved by President Cárdenas November 21, 2005 Goals reordered January 31, 2006.
ASCCC Cultural Competency and Advocacy Plan Update Cleavon Smith, Berkeley City College Carolyn Holcroft, Foothill College.
External Review Exit Report Campbell County Schools November 15-18, 2015.
Gender Focal Point Network Training & Orientation
STEM at Grace Lower School
CHAPTER 11 Academic Development and Planning for College and Career Readiness K-12.
Guided Pathways at California Community Colleges
Guided Pathways at California Community Colleges
Guided Pathways at California Community Colleges
Gender Equity in Computing
Presentation transcript:

STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D.

A History of STEM Participation Spotty before WWII Women’s wartime opportunities (the first “computers”— “Men built the machines, but women made them work”) Access to education for minorities (separate and unequal; not “science material”) STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

The Post-Sputnik Push NDEA and financial support for STEM study Teacher preparation New curricula Science experiences “Incidental inclusion” STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Structural Barriers in STEM Education Segregation of schools and under-resourcing of schools serving URM students -Barriers to students w/ disabilities in schools -Curricular options Cultural assumptions re: capacity and/or interest Program segregation (home ec vs. shop; “Girls High) STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

The Legal and Judicial Battles for Access Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) Titles VI and VII (1964) Executive Order (1965) Title IX (1972) Section 504 (1973) DeFunis vs. Odegaard (1974) Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

The Legal and Judicial Battles for Access (cont’d) Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (1980) Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) Adarand Contractors vs. Peña (1995) Grutter vs. Bollinger; Gratz vs. Bollinger (2003) Fisher vs. University of Texas-Austin (pending) Various state ballot initiatives STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Cultural Battles for Access Civil rights movement Women’s movement Disability rights movement More “nuanced” movements within education (First Gen, minority males) STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Historical Approaches and Interventions in the Out of School Space Mathematics as a “critical filter” 1973 Overcoming Math Anxiety 1978 Expanding Your Horizons (Math/Science Network) 1974 MESA 1970; MEP 1973 National Advisory Council on Minorities in Engineering 1974 Minorities in Engineering: A Blueprint for Action AAAS Project on the Handicapped in Science 1975 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

What We Learned about STEM Education for All from Out of School Programs (from Equity and Excellence: Compatible Goals) Strong academic component in math, science, communications Highly qualified teachers who believe students can learn Emphasis on applications and career connections Interdisciplinary with hands-on opportunities, incorporation of computing Multi-year involvement Strong leadership with stable, committed staff STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

What We Learned from Out of School Programs (cont’d) Stable funding base, multiple sources Broad recruitment Multi-sector cooperation Opportunities for in-and out-of-school learning Parental involvement/community support Specific attention to race/gender related inequalities Professionals and staff who look like students Peer support systems/ no “tokens” Evaluation, follow-up, data collection “Mainstreaming” into institutional programs STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

What’s Needed In School and Out of School? A systems approach A clear vision Evidence-based strategies Content, Context, Culture and Community STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

A System of Solutions For want of a nail the shoe was lost. For want of a shoe the horse was lost. For want of a horse the rider was lost. For want of a rider the battle was lost. For want of a battle the kingdom was lost. And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Schools that don’t work for all students (Belief, behavior, practice, policy) Accountability without support,using imperfect standards (e.g., teaching to bad tests) (Policy) College level programs that don’t work even for the students who get there-- Talking About Leaving “Weeding, not cultivating” (Belief) Teacher –centered rather than learner centered (Behavior) Disciplinary culture (“Hyper-competitiveness” of many STEM fields) STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Framing the Problems Attrition Interest Preparation Hard work STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Re-framing the Problems Retention Attraction Support Working smart STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Challenges Messaging matters Money matters Where the learning environment is problematic The quality of the learning experience The culture of STEM Reward structure of the academy STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Takeaway Lessons Learning from fields with large and consistent increases Looking at interventions within fields that share your challenges Looking at experiments/interventions in computer science STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Life sciences Near universal course taking in high school High percentage of in-field teachers High percentage of female teachers Compelling topics “Connection to self/community” Critical mass STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Medicine Removal of “informal’ barriers via legal remedy Perception of openness/fairness  more applications from women More application  more admissions Med schools in MSIs Compelling topics and strong attraction Socially attractive (image and visibility) Strong undergrad advisory infrastructure Clear pathway BUT……. STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Institutions/Departments/Programs that Stand Out for Success STC’s vs. regular departments Physics vs. Applied Physics at Michigan Kati Haycock’s examples success-in-america-where-are-we-what-can-we-do- 1 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Lessons Learned from Successful Efforts Un-stack the K-12 deck (A’s are C’s; teacher assignment; course availability; remedial focus) Leadership- Student success a priority Tap into institutional culture to achieve student success “Faculty as problem solvers not problems to be solved” Data (disaggregated) for action Make mandatory the things that work STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Lessons Learned (cont’d) Evaluate programs and make adjustments based on what is learned Develop and monitor retention plans Highlight the clear pathways to success (Rein in choices) Focus on course improvement of introductory and developmental courses Use effective advising models STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

Unpacking the Data Males and females Different URMs Different disabilities Males and females within each URM or disability group STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?

% Women Bachelor’s Degrees, disaggregated by race/ethnicity in select “High Performance” STEM Fields, 2010 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Agricultural sciences 48% Male 52% Female 42% Male 58% Female Biological sciences Psychology 23% Male 77% Female Source: Calculated from NSF, NCES 2010, Table 5.2

% Women Bachelor’s Degrees, disaggregated by race/ethnicity in select “Average Performance STEM Fields, 2010 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences 39% Female 61% Male Source: Calculated from NSF, NCES 2010, Table % Female Mathematics and Statistics 42% Male 58% Male

% Women Bachelor’s Degrees, disaggregated by race/ethnicity in select “Average Performance STEM Fields, 2010 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Chemistry 49% Female 51% Male Source: Calculated from NSF, NCES 2010, Table % Female Chemical engineering 42% Male 70% Male

% Women Bachelor’s Degrees, disaggregated by race/ethnicity in select “Low Performance” STEM Fields, 2010 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? Physics 80% Male 20% Female 91% Male 9% Female Electrical engineering Mechanical engineering 89% Male 11% Female Source: Calculated from NSF, NCES 2010, Table 5.2

% Bachelor’s Degrees, disaggregated by race/ethnicity in “Low Performance” Computer Science, 2010 STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute? 18% Female 82% Male Source: Calculated from NSF, NCES 2010, Table 5.2 Computer sciences

The Way Forward Single-sex education in low performance fields? (Smith College and Picker Engineering) Critical mass Teacher preparation New curricula (more applications, cultural links, career connection) Experiences and career exploration (e.g., AAAS Entry Point!) “Deliberate inclusion” and questioning absence STEM Education for All: Why Doesn’t this Yet Compute?