    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                            ACHIEVING THE PROMISE OF
                            A DIVERSE STEM WORKFORCE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 9, 2019

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 116-17

                                   __________

     Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    36-256PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2019

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, po@custhelp.com.

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                 HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
    ZOE LOFGREN, California              FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
    DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois                Ranking Member
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             MO BROOKS, Alabama
    AMI BERA, California,                BILL POSEY, Florida
        Vice Chair                       RANDY WEBER, Texas
    CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania             BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas               ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
    HALEY STEVENS, Michigan              ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
    KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma                RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
    MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
    BRAD SHERMAN, California             TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               PETE OLSON, Texas
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
    ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado              MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 JIM BAIRD, Indiana
    BILL FOSTER, Illinois                JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
    DON BEYER, Virginia                  JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
    CHARLIE CRIST, Florida                   Rico
    SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                VACANCY
    KATIE HILL, California
    BEN McADAMS, Utah
    JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia

                            C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  May 9, 2019

                                                                       Page
    Hearing Charter..................................................     2

                               Opening Statements

    Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman,
      Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
      Representatives................................................     9
        Written statement............................................    10

    Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Ranking Member,
      Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
      Representatives................................................    10
        Written statement............................................    12

                                   Witnesses:

    Dr. Mae Jemison, Principal, 100 Year Starship
        Oral Statement...............................................    14
        Written Statement............................................    16

    Dr. Shirley Malcom, Senior Advisor and Director of SEA Change,
      American Association for the Advancement of Science
        Oral Statement...............................................    31
        Written Statement............................................    33

    Dr. Lorelle Espinosa, Vice President for Research, American
      Council on Education
        Oral Statement...............................................    44
        Written Statement............................................    46

    Dr. James L. Moore III, Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion
      and Chief Diversity Officer, Ohio State University
        Oral Statement...............................................    57
        Written Statement............................................    59

    Ms. Barbara Whye, Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer, Vice
      President of Human Resources, Intel
        Oral Statement...............................................    68
        Written Statement............................................    70

    Discussion.......................................................    98

                 Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

    Dr. Mae Jemison, Principal, 100 Year Starship....................   128

    Dr. Shirley Malcom, Senior Advisor and Director of SEA Change,
      American Association for the Advancement of Science............   136

    Dr. Lorelle Espinosa, Vice President for Research, American
      Council on Education...........................................   147

    Dr. James L. Moore III, Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion
      and Chief Diversity Officer, Ohio State University.............   155

    Ms. Barbara Whye, Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer, Vice
      President of Human Resources, Intel............................   170

                Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record

    Policy recommendations submitted by Representative Eddie Bernice
      Johnson, Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and
      Technology, U.S. House of Representatives......................   176

    Letter submitted by Representative Haley Stevens, Committee on
      Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..   180

                            ACHIEVING THE PROMISE OF.
                            A DIVERSE STEM WORKFORCE

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 9, 2019

                      House of Representatives,
                   Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                       Washington, D.C.

        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room
    2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson
    [Chairwoman of the Committee] presiding.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. The hearing will come to order. Without
    objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at any
    time.
        Let me welcome all of you to today's hearing, and I'm eager
    to hear from today's distinguished panel of witnesses, each of
    whom is a leader in overcoming obstacles to bring more people
    into STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)
    studies and careers. So I thank you for the work that you do
    and for being with us today.
        There is no denying the fact that our success as a Nation
    is closely tied to our capacity to build and sustain a highly
    skilled workforce, one that is equipped to take on the pressing
    challenges of the 21st century and to maintain our leadership
    in the global economy.
        Right now, we are facing grave challenges on many fronts.
    We are battling an opioid crisis and seeking cures for diseases
    like cancer. We are losing lives every day to gun violence and
    suicide. We are rooting out terrorists and fighting back
    against attempts to hack our democracy. We are racing to find
    sustainable sources of energy and working to mitigate the
    destructive effects of climate change.
        Meanwhile, our economic competitiveness is threatened as
    competitors like China invest heavily in science and make
    advances in critical technologies like quantum computing and
    artificial intelligence.
        To solve these problems, we need a cadre of trained
    scientists and engineers pushing the boundaries of what we know
    and what we can achieve. We need computer scientists and
    economists, biologists and mathematicians, engineers, chemists,
    and social scientists. So far, we have gotten by with a STEM
    (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) workforce
    that does not come close to representing the diversity of our
    Nation. However, if we continue to leave behind so much of our
    Nation's brainpower, we cannot succeed.
        The Census Bureau predicts that by 2045, over half of all
    Americans will be non-white. Over half of all children under 18
    will be non-white by 2020. As the rest of the country becomes
    more diverse, the STEM workforce has been slow to respond. In
    addition, I have watched with dismay for decades as women have
    also made too few gains in the STEM workforce. Discrimination,
    harassment, bias, and cultural and institutional barriers are
    preventing many of our brightest minds from realizing their
    greatest potential.
        Today's discussion is long overdue. The last time the
    Science Committee held a hearing focused on the issue of
    broadening participation in STEM was in March 2010. Dr. Malcom
    can confirm that because she was here testifying about the
    challenges facing women, minorities, and persons with
    disabilities at all levels of education and career development.
        I'm sorry to say that in the years since this Committee
    last addressed this issue, progress has been very slow. Some
    fields have seen no gains at all. In 2010, women earned 20
    percent of physics bachelor's degrees; today, they earn 19
    percent. The share of engineering degrees earned by black men
    is the same today as it was in 2010, just 3 percent. Hispanic
    women are still earning less than 2 percent of bachelor's
    degrees in computer science.
        We have a lot of work to do. As Chairwoman of the Science
    Committee I am determined to do what I can to move the needle.
    I was very glad to be joined by my good friend and Ranking
    Member, Mr. Lucas, in introducing H.R. 2528, the STEM
    Opportunities Act of 2019, earlier this week. This bill
    supports policy reforms and research and data collection to
    understand and lower barriers faced by women and minority
    researchers in academia and Federal laboratories.
        The way I see it, we have two possible futures: One in
    which we embrace the changing face of our Nation, and one in
    which our leadership continues to erode. The choice is an easy
    one, but the work required to get us there is not.
        I look forward to hearing the recommendations and insight
    from this wise panel on how we get there.
        [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]

        Good morning and thank you, Chairman Lamb, for holding this
    timely hearing on two of our most valuable renewable energy
    resources, solar energy and wind energy.
        Over the past ten years, costs of both wind and solar
    energy have decreased dramatically, making them a vital part of
    the energy mix of the U.S. According to a recent report from
    Austin-based analysis firm TXP, solar and wind energy saved
    Texans $5.7 billion in electricity costs from 2010 to 2017,
    compared to what they would have paid if these renewable energy
    sources were not part of the energy portfolio.
        I'm proud to say that Texas now leads the U.S. in installed
    wind energy capacity, with over 24 gigawatts of wind energy.
    That's enough energy to power over 7 million homes. The wind
    energy industry also brings tens of thousands of jobs to the
    state, including jobs at several manufacturing facilities that
    support the wind industry by making products like blades,
    towers, and turbine housings.
        All that being said, we still have significant investments
    we need to make to continue to innovate on these technologies,
    further bringing down their costs and making these technologies
    even more beneficial for Americans.
        In the wind industry, for example, we are exploring new
    technologies like offshore wind, which has significant
    potential for leveraging untapped energy resources near our
    coastal communities, and needs important R&D investments to
    help bring down costs. In the solar industry, we are continuing
    to explore new types of solar cells made of advanced materials
    with record-setting efficiencies, at affordable prices.
        We really can make investments that are both good for the
    environment, and for the economy. That's why I am looking
    forward to hearing from the distinguished witnesses assembled
    here today to learn about how we can support innovation in the
    solar and wind industries, ensuring that these important energy
    resources can play an even larger role in our clean energy
    future.
        With that, I yield back.

        Chairwoman Johnson. Before I recognize Mr. Lucas for this
    opening statement, I ask for the Business Roundtable principles
    of ``Investing in People and a STEM Workforce'' and principles
    on ``Pursuing Inclusive Innovation'' be placed in the record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
        Chairwoman Johnson. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Lucas for
    an opening statement.
        Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson, for holding this
    hearing today to discuss how we can achieve the promise of a
    more diverse STEM workforce in the United States. This
    Committee has a long bipartisan history of supporting STEM
    education for all, and I look forward to continuing that today.
        When women and minorities face cultural and institutional
    barriers to access and advancement in STEM careers, our
    Nation's technological competitiveness suffers. The only way
    we'll achieve our potential is by utilizing America's most
    valuable resource: Our people. That means developing a diverse
    STEM-capable workforce from every education level and from
    every background.
        STEM employment in the U.S. continues to grow faster than
    any other sector, and we are struggling to meet that demand. In
    order to meet it, the development of talent from all groups is
    essential. More graduates with STEM degrees means more advanced
    technologies and a more robust economy. But it's not just about
    the economy. STEM graduates have the potential to develop
    technologies that could save thousands of lives, jumpstart a
    new industry, or even discover new worlds.
        Women and the underrepresented minorities constitute a
    substantial proportion of the U.S. population. However, our
    STEM workforce fails to reflect this diversity. While women
    make up half of the U.S. workforce, they comprise less than 30
    percent of the STEM workforce. Similarly, underrepresented
    racial and ethnic groups make up only 11 percent of the STEM
    workforce.
        This week, I joined Chairwoman Johnson in cosponsoring the
    STEM Opportunities Act of 2019 to help address this disparity.
    This bill requires more comprehensive data collection on
    students, researchers, and faculty receiving Federal science
    grants. This data will help us identify and reduce the barriers
    that prevent underrepresented groups from entering and
    advancing in STEM. It will also help us measure the success of
    Federal STEM programs.
        As many of the Members of this Committee know, I am a proud
    graduate of a land-grant institution, the OSU, as we say, at
    Oklahoma State University, not to be confused with Dr. Moore's
    institution, the other OSU. The land-grant mission is to serve
    students of all backgrounds and influence people's lives beyond
    the boundaries of the classroom in service to the community.
        In my home district, I have seen this mission brought to
    life at both OSU and at Langston University, which is a
    historically black college and a land-grant institution.
    Minority-serving institutions like Langston are successfully
    making strides in increasing the number of minority students
    graduating with STEM degrees.
        It is important that we also increase STEM opportunities
    for American Indian and Alaska Native students, who are also
    unfortunately overlooked in this discussion. The STEM
    Opportunities Act of 2019  will bolster the NSF's Tribal
    Colleges and Universities Program by providing grants to
    enhance computer science education at these institutions.
    Access to computer science resources and the development of
    computing skills is critical for underrepresented students in
    both rural and urban communities.
        I'd like to thank our witnesses for being here. This entire
    panel not only brings a wealth of leadership and expertise in
    STEM education and workforce development, but they also provide
    inspiration to students of all backgrounds who are pursuing
    STEM careers. I look forward to hearing more from each of you
    about how we can support, encourage, and develop the next
    generation of STEM students.
        Last, I again want to thank Chairwoman Johnson for her
    leadership on this important issue. I know it's a subject near
    and dear to her heart, and I look forward to working with her
    on the STEM Opportunities Act and additional STEM legislation
    focused on rural students in the coming year.
        Thank you, witnesses, for being here, and I yield back the
    balance of my time, Madam Chair.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Lucas follows:]

        Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson for holding this hearing
    today to discuss how we can achieve the promise of a more
    diverse STEM workforce in the United States.
        This Committee has a long bi-partisan history of supporting
    STEM education for all and I look forward to continuing that
    today.
        When women and minorities face cultural and institutional
    barriers to access and advancement in STEM careers, our
    nation's technological competitiveness suffers. The only way
    we'll achieve our potential is by utilizing America's most
    valuable resource: Our people. That means developing a diverse
    STEM-capable workforce from every education level and from
    every background.
        STEM employment in the U.S. continues to grow faster than
    any other sector and we are struggling to meet that demand.
        In order to meet it, the development of talent from all
    groups is essential. More graduates with STEM degrees means
    more advanced technologies and a more robust economy.
        But it is not just about the economy. STEM graduates have
    the potential to develop technologies that could save thousands
    of lives, jump-start a new industry, or even discover new
    worlds.
        Women and underrepresented minorities constitute a
    substantial proportion of the U.S. population; however our STEM
    workforce fails to reflect this diversity. While women make up
    half of the U.S. workforce, they comprise less than 30 percent
    of the STEM workforce. Similarly, underrepresented racial and
    ethnic groups make up only 11 percent of the STEM workforce.
        This week I joined Chairwoman Johnson in co-sponsoring the
    ``STEM Opportunities Act of 2019'' to help address this
    disparity.
        This bill requires more comprehensive data collection on
    the students, researchers, and faculty receiving federal
    science grants. This data will help us identify and reduce the
    barriers that prevent underrepresented groups from entering and
    advancing in STEM. It will also help us measure the success of
    federal STEM programs.
        As many of the Members of this Committee know, I am a proud
    graduate of a land-grant institution - The OSU, Oklahoma State
    University. Not to be confused with Dr. Moore's institution,
    the other OSU. The land-grant mission is to serve students of
    all backgrounds, and influence people's lives beyond the
    boundaries of the classroom in service to the community.
        In my home district, I have seen this mission brought to
    life at both OSU and Langston University, which is a
    historically black college and a land-grant institution.
    Minority-serving institutions like Langston are successfully
    making strides in increasing the number of minority students
    graduating with STEM degrees.
        It is important that we also increase STEM opportunities
    for American Indian and Alaska Native students, who are often
    overlooked in this discussion. The ``STEM Opportunities Act of
    2019'' will bolster the NSF's Tribal Colleges and Universities
    Program (TCUP) by providing grants to enhance computer science
    education at these institutions.
        Access to computer science resources and the development of
    computing skills is critical for underrepresented students in
    both rural and urban communities.
        I'd like to thank our witnesses for being here. This entire
    panel not only brings a wealth of leadership and expertise in
    STEM education and workforce development, but they also provide
    inspiration to students of all backgrounds who are pursuing
    STEM careers. I look forward to hearing more from each of you
    about how we can support, encourage and develop the next
    generation of STEM students.
        Lastly, I want to again thank Chairwomen Johnson for her
    leadership on this important issue. I know it is a subject near
    and dear to her heart, and I look forward to working with her
    on the STEM Opportunities Act and additional STEM legislation
    focused on rural students in the coming year.
        Thank you witnesses for being here and I yield back the
    balance of my time.

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Lucas.
        Are there other Members who wish to submit additional
    opening statements to the record?
        At this time, I'd like to introduce our witnesses. Our
    first witness is Dr. Mae Jemison. Dr. Jemison leads 100 Year
    Starship, a global initiative seed funded through a competitive
    grant from DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) to
    ensure capabilities for human travel to another star within the
    next 100 years while transforming life on Earth. Dr. Jemison
    served 6 years as a NASA astronaut and was the first woman of
    color in the world to go into space. She is also Chair of the
    National Academies' study on ``Promising Practices for
    Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science,
    Engineering, and Medicine.'' I welcome Dr. Jemison.
        Our next witness is Dr. Shirley Malcom. Dr. Malcom is a
    Senior Advisor and Director of SEA (STEM Equality Achievement)
    Change at the American Association for the Advancement of
    Science (AAAS). She works to support research and practice to
    improve the quality and increase access to education and
    careers in STEM fields. She served on the National Science
    Board, on President Clinton's Committee of Advisors on Science
    and Technology. Dr. Malcom also serves as Co-Chair of the
    Gender Advisory Board of the U.N. Commission on Science and
    Technology for Development and Gender Insight.
        After Dr. Malcom is Dr. Lorelle Espinosa. Dr. Espinosa is
    the Vice President for Research at the American Council on
    Education (ACE). She is responsible for developing and managing
    the organization's thought leadership portfolio and for
    ensuring a strong evidence base across ACE's programs and
    services. Prior to ACE, she held senior roles at the
    Institution of Higher Education Policy, IHEP, Associates. Dr.
    Espinosa is Co-Chair of the National Academies Study Committee,
    ``Closing the Equity Gap: Revitalizing STEM Education and
    Workforce Readiness Programs in the Nation's Minority-Serving
    Institutions.''
        Our fourth witness, Dr. James Moore. Dr. Moore is Vice
    Provost for Diversity and Inclusion and Chief Diversity Officer
    of The Ohio State University. He's also the Distinguished
    Professor of Urban Education in the College of Education and
    Human Ecology, Inaugural Executive Director of the Todd Anthony
    Bell National Resource Center on the African-American Male.
    From 2015 to 2017, Dr. Moore served as Program Director for
    Broadening Participation in Engineering at the National Science
    Foundation. His research focuses on school counseling, gifted
    urban multicultural higher education, and STEM education.
        And finally, Dr. Barbara Whye. Ms. Whye is Intel's Chief
    Diversity Inclusion Officer and Chief Human Resources Officer
    for Technology, Systems Architecture, and Client Group. She
    also leads Intel's Diversity and Technology Initiative to reach
    full representation of women and underrepresented minorities in
    Intel's workforce. She has led the investment strategy for
    Intel's global STEM education portfolio with a focus on girls
    and other underrepresented populations. She joined Intel more
    than 20 years ago as an engineer.
        As our witnesses should know, you will have 5 minutes for
    your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be included
    in the record for the hearing. And so when you--when all of you
    have completed your spoken testimony, we will begin the round
    of questions. Each Member will have 5 minutes to question the
    panel.
        So now we will start with Dr. Jemison.

                      TESTIMONY OF DR. MAE JEMISON,

                      PRINCIPAL, 100 YEAR STARSHIP

        Dr. Jemison. Thank you for inviting me here today.
        And I want to start off by talking about 100 Year Starship,
    which is about trying to make sure we have the capabilities for
    human interstellar travel within 100 years that was seed-funded
    by DARPA. And the reason why we're doing that is because I
    believe that pursuing an extraordinary tomorrow creates a
    better world today. It's by pushing ourselves today that we
    have the ability to incorporate all of this incredible
    technology that we're looking at.
        I am an individual who has been exposed to the most
    advanced technologies and bountiful economic resources and at
    the same time a woeful pittance of human compassion. I am an
    individual who has lived with people who have meager resources
    and who've persevered in conditions that would try us all. They
    relied on technologies that have been around for thousands of
    years but they would share what they have with a stranger.
        This is where I'm coming from because over the course of my
    career and training as a doctor, as an engineer, I have
    attended and taught in schools and programs and universities
    which have been classified at different times as the best and
    the worst in our Nation, Cambodian refugee camps, Chicago
    public schools, Los Angeles Unified School District, Sierra
    Leone, Dartmouth, Cornell, Stanford, and it's from that
    perspective that I bring my comments.
        When I left NASA, the first thing I did was start an
    international science camp called The Earth We Share. Because
    my mother had been a schoolteacher for over 25 years in Chicago
    public schools. I recognized how important it was to do active
    work around science literacy, that is the ability to read an
    article in the newspaper about a subject, whether it be the
    environment or health, and be able to understand it. And we
    work with kids around the world.
        It is important that we have greater representation
    because, right now, STEM fields--science, technology,
    engineering, and mathematics--are slashing a path to the
    future, right? And that future is not necessarily one that we
    can be assured is going to be beneficial. But the scientists,
    the engineers, and those who fund and support them get to do a
    couple of things. They get to choose the problems to be worked
    on and researched. They get to choose the methodologies with
    which that problem will be approached. They get to choose to
    keep data sets or to throw them out as irrelevant or flawed.
    The scientists and engineers and those who fund and support
    them also have an opportunity to decide the priority with which
    problems are addressed. They get an opportunity to decide and
    evaluate whether a solution was effective or not.
        So when you think about that, it requires that we have full
    representation. It's not a nicety; it's a necessity because
    we're losing so much of that perspective that we have to bear.
        And when we look at what was really a difficult situation,
    women and people of color in this country have contributed over
    the years in countless ways despite being left out. So if you
    look from Rosalind Franklin, whether you look at the women who
    coded for NASA and did all the kinds of work in mathematics, we
    know that they've done an incredible job. We see every day that
    women have done an incredible job. We see every day from Dr.
    Daniel Hale Williams and you can go on and on. African
    Americans have contributed; people of color contributed. So
    what we have to do is to make sure that we use all the talent.
        I'm really excited about this bill. I want to throw in a
    couple things. What child doesn't deserve an excellent teacher?
    This really starts with education. With me today is Dr. Peggy
    Brookins, who is the head of the National Board of Professional
    Teaching Standards because we need to have education and
    standards. I've been excited to work with Bayer Corporation
    over the years. Solutions exist where we've been able to change
    the curriculum so that we do hands-on science education, which
    is the most effective way to do it. And the ASSET program has
    lifted not only science scores but reading and mathematics
    scores even more. The Earth We Share, which I talked about,
    brought and trained teachers from around the world.
        And then finally, if I look at what can I offer for the
    bill, it ranges from making sure we think about skilled
    technicians and labor who really make up most of the tech
    workforce, to making sure that we hold organizations
    accountable.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Jemison follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you.
        Dr. Malcom.

                    TESTIMONY OF DR. SHIRLEY MALCOM,

               SENIOR ADVISOR AND DIRECTOR OF SEA CHANGE,

                      AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE

                         ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE

        Dr. Malcom. Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and
    Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify. I'm Shirley Malcom, Senior Advisor and Director of SEA
    Change at the American Association for the Advancement of
    Science, the largest general scientific society in the United
    States and publisher of the Science family of journals. Our
    mission is simple: To advance science, engineering, and
    innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all people.
        I have spent my entire career working to address concerns
    around equity in STEM. I do this partly because of my own
    pathway from the Jim Crow South to years as the only in my
    class, my major, in my lab group, in my faculty, in my
    committees, on boards. I was drawn to science at the launch of
    Sputnik because of the compelling vision and opportunities,
    even for a little girl from Birmingham for understanding and
    making a difference in the world, for earning a living and
    making a life.
        There are many more people out there from all backgrounds
    and experiences who are drawn to STEM and who need to see a
    pathway to turn interest into outcomes. STEM needs these people
    for the energy, dynamism, and diverse perspectives they bring.
    The U.S. research and education cannot be excellent unless
    they're inclusive. Diversity improves the inputs and the
    outcomes. The vibrancy and strength of the U.S. economy and the
    health, security, and quality of life of our citizens are all
    intertwined with the health of the scientific enterprise and
    are products of the investment that this country has made in
    STEM research and education. Our Nation has supported invention
    and innovation across diverse fields and partnered with the
    private sector producing the most powerful engine for economic
    growth in the world.
        But that is not guaranteed. At the core of the economy are
    people, not just the scientists and the engineers and the
    mathematicians in our colleges and universities and industries,
    national labs and biomedical facilities but also the STEM
    teachers, technicians, managers, financiers, patent attorneys,
    and others whose collective efforts, grounded in science, fuel
    the innovation economy. STEM knowledge and skills are not just
    requirements for those of us in STEM but for all throughout the
    workforce and across our society, from farmers utilizing
    weather data and robotics to manage crops to those who care for
    us when we are sick using high-tech diagnostic tools.
        We can only get to this point by expanding the pool of
    talent, tapping into the vast well of women and minorities and
    persons with disabilities who are currently underrepresented in
    STEM. We know that these groups don't participate in STEM at
    levels that are reflected in either the population or in higher
    education, and there are losses at each successive level.
        This isn't just a reflection of interest or the impact of
    personal choices. Choice is not what it seems. Choices aren't
    always informed and may be driven by lack of opportunity or
    stereotyping. Minority students who come from high-needs K-12
    schools may not have opportunities to participate in programs
    or classes that would enable them to explore their interest in
    STEM. Poor early-stage preparation and uninspired teaching
    compounded by low expectations can make it difficult to move
    forward. At later stages the absence of role models,
    institutional and classroom climate, a culture of weeding out,
    isolation and the lack of community, incivility, bias, and
    harassment can all prevent participation.
        At AAAS we're engaged in efforts to address the systemic
    problems that create barriers to success. Among these are
    efforts to address the culture change within STEM such as the
    Societies Consortium on Sexual Harassment in STEM with 100
    society members; making role models more visible as in the AAAS
    IF/THEN and AAAS-Lemelson Invention Ambassadors programs, and
    building community for diversity, equity, and inclusion.
        The most ambitious undertaking, however, is SEA Change.
    Based on a model from higher education in the U.K., SEA Change
    recognizes colleges and universities for work to improve gender
    and race ethnic equity in STEM. Participating institutions
    voluntarily develop a data-driven plan to address issues of
    diversity, equity, and inclusion, aligning their plan with
    specific context of the institutions. Institutional plans are
    developed by rigorous self-assessment and using data to try to
    understand where we have to go forward.
        With funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, AAAS and
    Education Council are updating resources that assist colleges
    and universities to try to figure out how to do this in ways
    that are also consistent with judicial rulings and the legal
    aspects that may come into question.
        We see much within the STEM Opportunities Act that is
    highly complementary with SEA Change, and we look forward to
    working together to figure out how to make those synergies
    happen. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Malcom follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much.
        Dr. Espinosa.

                   TESTIMONY OF DR. LORELLE ESPINOSA,

                      VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH,

                     AMERICAN COUNCIL ON EDUCATION

        Dr. Espinosa. Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and
    Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify today on this important topic.
        My name is Lorelle Espinosa, and I'm the Vice President for
    Research at the American Council on Education with a 20-year
    professional focus on diversity and inclusion in the STEM
    fields.
        Today, I'm here primarily in my capacity as Co-Chair of the
    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's
    Committee on Minority Serving Institutions, which recently
    published the report ``Minority-Serving Institutions: America's
    Underutilized Resource for Strengthening the STEM Workforce.''
    I have submitted a copy of the publication's highlights, along
    with my written testimony.
        The report has many key findings, recommendations, and
    strategies related to strengthening STEM education and research
    at the more than 700 2- and 4-year minority-serving
    institutions, also known as MSIs, across the United States.
    MSIs, of which half are community colleges, enroll nearly 30
    percent of all undergraduates, including a sizable portion of
    the Nation's STEM students, yet are vastly under-resourced and
    in need of critical STEM infrastructure.
        In addition to their reach, it is important to acknowledge
    who MSIs enroll, namely a large proportion of students of
    color, many of whom are low-income and the first in their
    families to attend college. Given this, many MSIs have
    developed, with intentionality, ways to offer a rich set of
    academic and social support systems for students that help them
    thrive academically and prepare for meaningful and sustained
    contributions to the workforce and to our society.
        Of the committee's 10 recommendations to MSI stakeholders,
    specific actions we recommend Congress take include, first,
    incenting greater investments in MSIs and the strategies that
    support their student success as outlined in our report and in
    my written testimony. This includes new and expanded funding
    mechanisms that strengthen STEM infrastructure and encourage
    innovative teaching, learning, and laboratory experiences, as
    well as substantial growth and mutually beneficial public-
    private partnerships. Such investment requires significant
    increases in annual appropriations to support capacity
    building, funds for MSIs, and need-based student financial aid,
    including scholarship aid.
        Second, taking strategic actions to enhance the clarity,
    transparency, and accountability for Federal investments in
    STEM education and research at MSIs. It is in the Nation's best
    interest not only to establish new and expand current STEM-
    focused investments but also to increase the information
    available about these funds and their impacts to the MSIs
    themselves and to their many stakeholders.
        Third, requiring that federally funded programs include
    proper resources for a rigorous evaluation component in order
    to measure the impact of these investments on student learning
    and career outcomes for STEM graduates at MSIs.
        For improvements in the short term, Congress should require
    all relevant Federal agencies to identify an MSI liaison to
    coordinate activities, track investments, and report progress
    toward increasing MSI participation in STEM research and
    development programs.
        Next, undertake a production of an annual procurement
    forecast of opportunities, including grants, contracts, and
    subcontract opportunities and cooperative and other
    transactional agreements that will enable increased
    participation of MSIs in basic, applied, and advanced STEM
    research and development programs. This report could serve as a
    critical resource for policymakers, government agencies, and
    MSIs themselves to assess and benchmark the impact of national
    investments in high-potential but underserved communities. This
    forecast report may further encourage other stakeholders to
    partner with MSIs in new and innovative ways.
        Next, report on the level of participation of MSIs in prime
    or subrecipient or contractors in STEM-related activities,
    including the type of procurement mechanisms and the current
    investment totals that support STEM research and development.
        Finally, Congress can track proposal submissions by MSIs in
    Federal contracts, grants, cooperative, and other transactional
    agreements and Small Business Innovation Research and
    technology transfer programs.
        In closing, as the Nation continues to grow more diverse,
    the proportion of MSIs in America's higher education system
    will continue to grow. These institutions are a valuable but
    underutilized asset for the Nation, and with greater investment
    and intentional support from Congress, States, and the private
    sector, they can contribute in significant ways to local,
    regional, and national economic development and job creation.
        Thank you for your time and attention and for your
    commitment to diversifying and strengthening our STEM workforce
    in this country, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Espinosa follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much.
        Before the next witness, I want to acknowledge the presence
    of Dr. Rush Holt, a former Member of this Committee, who is now
    directing AAAS. Thank you for being here.
        Dr. James Moore.

                  TESTIMONY OF DR. JAMES L. MOORE, III,

                VICE PROVOST FOR DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

                      AND CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICER,

                       THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY

        Dr. Moore. Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and
    Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to speak
    with your distinguished Committee today. Again, my name is
    James Moore from The Ohio State University.
        It is a considerable honor to be here today, and I would
    like to commend Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking Member Lucas for
    the leadership of the STEM Opportunities Act. I also would be
    remiss if I didn't thank Representatives Anthony Gonzalez and
    Troy Balderson for helping to make my testimony possible. I
    also would like to thank Representative Joyce Beatty from
    Columbus, Ohio, although she is not a Member of the Committee,
    but she is a very active advocate for broadened participation
    in STEM.
        How OSU is addressing the lack of diversity in STEM fields
    is best illustrated through a pair of Ohio students, Shelby
    Newsad and Omari Gaskins. Shelby grew up in Beverly, a village
    of 1,300 in southeastern Ohio, not too far as the crow flies
    from Representative Balderson's district. Like many rural
    districts, Shelby's small high school lacked basic science
    labs, and her only science courses were taught out of old
    fading textbooks.
        While Shelby's intellect earned her a Morrill Scholarship,
    one of Ohio State's premier diversity merit scholarship
    programs, she struggled in her biosciences major. As she headed
    to special tutoring sessions, she questioned whether she would
    ever catch up to her peers.
        Now, Omari also grew up in Ohio but in urban Dayton, a
    once-proud city now battered by opiates and joblessness.
    Inspired by Marvel Comics and Iron Man movies, Omari joined a
    robotics team after he left his neighborhood school for a
    charter high school, smart enough to teach himself how to code
    but without the means to pay for college.
        Omari found a pathway to Ohio State thanks to our flagship
    Young Scholars Program, what we reference as YSP. Now in its
    30th year, YSP finds promising, low-income eighth-grade
    students in some of Ohio's most vulnerable school districts
    across the State. We provide our Young Scholars with ongoing
    academic support during their high school years and later offer
    them strong financial packages to Ohio State, provided that
    they maintain certain academic standards throughout high school
    and college.
        The ongoing support during their precollegiate and
    collegiate years allows students like Omari to pursue STEM
    fields and other academic areas. Currently, 43 percent of our
    Young Scholars are STEM majors. We have approximately over 800
    precollegiate students and over 400 students who are--who have
    matriculated at The Ohio State University.
        Both Shelby and Omari--one white, rural, and female, and
    the other black, urban, and male--teach us valuable lessons
    about diversity in STEM. Lesson one, we need to be innovative
    and inclusive in the way that we identify talent. We are losing
    too many promising students before they ever reach our doors
    simply because of their ZIP Code and the schools that they
    reside--that reside in these communities.
        Lesson two, when we find these students from underserved
    areas, they're often unprepared for college-level STEM
    coursework, requiring valuable human and financial resources to
    bring them up to speed. Sadly, this can cause them to want to
    quit college altogether.
        Higher education partnerships with school districts like
    YSP can help improve STEM education outcomes for students of
    color, especially those who attend high-poverty, under-
    resourced school systems.
        Further, early intervention programs can be a major part of
    the solution to the preparation gap. YSP intervenes at the
    eighth grade to ensure that students are prepared for college
    and offers ongoing academic support experiences.
        Major companies are beginning to understand the importance
    and significance of attracting STEM and non-STEM from diverse
    communities. Hence, J.P. Morgan Chase recently made a major
    investment in both our Morrill Scholars Program and Young
    Scholars Program to ensure our students develop the right
    skills and directions to enter the world of work.
        My own academic research has studied key factors impacting
    academic and career development of African-American males in
    STEM fields, and based on this research, we found that family
    influence and encouragement, positive K-12 experiences, their
    own interests and aspirations in STEM, as well as their
    academic experiences in college with their peers, college
    faculty, and staff were all crucial in impacting factors for
    African-American males.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Moore follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much.
        Now, Ms. Barbara Whye.

                       TESTIMONY OF BARBARA WHYE,

                 CHIEF DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION OFFICER,

                VICE PRESIDENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, INTEL

        Ms. Whye. Chairwoman Johnson, Ranking Member Lucas, and
    distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting
    me to be with you this morning. I'd also like to recognize
    Representative Bonamici from Oregon and Representative Biggs
    from Arizona.
        It was a STEM education that rapidly propelled me and my
    seven siblings out of poverty. I am the product of a STEM
    education. I was born in the South to two amazing parents who
    lived through segregation and racism like so many other black
    families. Their options for finishing high school were filled
    with insurmountable obstacles. Neither of my parents finished
    high school, yet they pushed on, they instilled in us the
    importance of an education. All eight of us became STEM
    professionals, scientists, engineers, and executives. I sit
    before you today as an engineer because I had access and role
    models.
        My great-great-grandparents were born enslaved in this
    country in the 1800s. Recently, I visited their tombstones in
    Conway, South Carolina. They had the wherewithal to name my
    great-great-grandfather Favor and his wife was named Pleasant.
    It is the same optimism that is a part of my inherited DNA that
    I believe we as a Nation can bring to this challenge.
        It is imperative that legislation expands opportunities in
    undergraduate STEM education for underserved students receiving
    degrees in STEM education. The STEM Opportunities Act does
    exactly that, and thank you, Madam Chair.
        For the proposed legislation to be successful, our country
    should quickly shift from problem-admiring to problem-solving.
    We have Einsteins all over our Nation who are untapped and who
    have not been given access to an equitable and quality
    education. As a Nation, we must put forth compelling, specific,
    and immediate steps to achieve a different outcome.
        Access to a quality education should be a basic human
    right. With the rate of technology and the increase of STEM
    jobs across this Nation, a STEM-ready student is a workforce-
    ready student. However, students all over this country cannot
    tap into the coursework that would put them on the right
    trajectory. Every child should have coding as a school subject
    and experience by third grade. Students are using technology in
    everything they do. They should understand the power and the
    opportunity it provides.
        Intel recognizes the importance of growing pathways. For
    example, we partner with three schools in the Navajo Nation and
    the Oakland Unified School District as a part of our $300-
    million diversity-in-tech commitment. Within 2 years, student
    enrollment in computer science classes increased by nearly 400
    percent.
        Being bold and taking specific actions is in the DNA of
    Intel. Through the leadership and commitment of our CEO Bob
    Swan, the executive team, and employees around the world, Intel
    has achieved full representation based on market availability
    in the U.S. workforce a full 2 years ahead of schedule. We have
    the ability within us to solve anything when we take action. We
    know the power of making the impossible possible, and the power
    lies within every single one of us.
        As you consider the legislation this Congress, I would ask
    this Committee to be bold in your actions and be transparent.
    We must strengthen our systems and hold leaders accountable to
    eradicate biases. You can hold programs accountable to ensure
    that students at the most mature stages of the pathway are
    successfully retained and complete their education as those
    earlier in the pathway.
        Ensure that HBCUs (historically black colleges and
    universities), HSIs (Hispanic serving institutions), and the
    tribal colleges have the resources to establish top-tier
    programs in the STEM disciplines. Focus on the creative
    programs and collaborations that emphasize hands-on STEM
    activities that connect technology careers to real
    applications. Authorize more funding to our STEM-based research
    and faculty programs, especially those targeting the
    underserved.
        The STEM Opportunities Act is a good start and a testament
    to this Committee's commitment to developing solutions to
    support underrepresented minorities and women in STEM. Intel
    will remain a committed partner to growing STEM opportunities
    and solutions, and I look forward to continuing the work with
    this Committee. Thank you for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Whye follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much.
        We will begin our first round of questioning. And I'll
    recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        Despite a lot of attention being focused on the issue of
    increasing the participation of women and underrepresented
    minorities, progress has been very slow and in some cases
    nonexistent. Why has so little progress been made despite the
    amount of resources and attention devoted to these issues and
    our knowledge of proven solutions? And you can start, Dr.
    Jemison, and we can just go down.
        Dr. Jemison. I want to just start off by saying I'm here
    also as the Chair of a committee of the National Academies of
    Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on how do we improve the
    representation and the leadership of women in STEM fields. And
    the report is due out in November, and I'm going to make sure
    we--everybody gets a copy. But some of the things that we are
    looking at is the fact that there are solutions. We already
    know how to increase things. The issue is how do we get
    individual organizations and institutions to enact them?
        And some of the things we're finding is many times it has
    to do with that perception that there's not enough support at
    the head of institutions. We know that when there is that
    support, things change. At Harvey Mudd College when Maria Klawe
    came in, she was able to triple the number of women graduating
    in computer sciences in 5 years, so it really has to do with
    institutional support at the top and there being some
    repercussions about not effecting change.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you.
        Dr. Malcom. We have invested in a lot of intervention
    programs over the years, and we do have a lot of answers for a
    lot of the barriers that we see. The difficulty I think is that
    we don't put the pieces together. This is one of the reasons
    that we have turned to SEA Change as a more systemic
    institutional transformational strategy. You can't have just
    someone worried about the entering student over there and not
    the graduate student over here. You've got to really look at
    the entirety of the policies, the practices, and the processes
    that are in place that put barriers in the way. And we utilize
    the interventions that appear actually as solutions to a lot of
    these things.
        I think that this notion of having a scaffold for
    institutions to look at all of these elements at the same time
    is really powerful. That is the only way to begin to look at
    these issues possibly at scale.
        Congresswoman Johnson, we were pleased to have you at the
    celebration and have you as the keynote at the celebration for
    SEA Change. Those institutions had gone through a process of
    self-assessment. They had gone through a process of actually
    looking at all of the aspects. They might not have chosen to
    deal with all of them, but they had solutions that had come
    from the earlier investments that have been made around
    intervention programs.
        So I think that we've got to move this to a different
    scale. We can't really up the numbers in a large amount without
    having institutional change. And having them do a lot more of
    the holistic strategies that it's really going to take to make
    a difference. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. Dr. Espinosa.
        Dr. Espinosa. Thank you for the question. The committee
    that I co-chaired would say that we're not investing dollars
    and attention into the institutions that are serving the
    greatest number of students of color and low-income students,
    again, our Nation's minority-serving institutions. These are
    institutions that are under-resourced and don't have, in many
    cases, the critical infrastructure that are needed.
        The best practices that we know--again, as someone just
    mentioned, we know a lot about what works in broadening
    participation. We know that undergraduate research experiences,
    for example, is a huge predictor of success, but we don't equip
    many of the institutions where these students are attending
    with the infrastructure to offer such experiences. So there is
    a great deal of focus in our report on many of these successful
    strategies.
        I'll just also mention that MSIs not only offer these
    experiences when they can, but they do it in a way that is
    culturally aware and in a way that sets high expectations for
    their students no matter where they start.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. Dr. Moore.
        Dr. Moore. I'll be succinct and try not to say some of the
    same things, but there are four--five things that is really
    important that should be thought about consistently. The first
    one is interest. We know how to get students interested in
    STEM, but it's not as much how do we sustain their interest.
    And as they--from--these are K-to-gray kinds of issues. Even
    the individuals who do obtain a STEM degree, oftentimes they
    opt out of the field because of the experiences that they had
    throughout the educational experience.
        The other one is preparation. Preparation is a major issue
    at the K-12 particularly, and sometimes it even seeps in at the
    graduate and professional level. All AP is not created equally.
    All honors is not created equal. Students matriculate at Ohio
    State and they realize they have classmates who had the same
    textbook, the same biology textbook in high school and that was
    the first time that they have ever been exposed to it. So we
    see malpractice going on throughout our educational
    institutions in America.
        The other one is experiences, making sure that they have
    adequate educational and career experiences that is indicative
    of what it means not only to go into a STEM field, to be a part
    of the new frontier of STEM. If we don't think about the new
    frontier of STEM, we'll just have another disparity even when
    they get in STEM.
        The next one is connections, making sure that they have
    access to mentors that reflect and look like them. You know,
    this is anecdotal. When I was at the National Science
    Foundation and when we would do reviews of other--we would do
    reviews of grants, if the professor was Iranian, it seemed like
    all the students were Iranian. When the professor was Chinese,
    it seems that all the professors were Chinese.
        And increasingly we know that HBCUs, minority-serving
    institutions, are educating a disproportion of underrepresented
    groups, but what is happening when you're not--when most people
    are not paying attention? The professors do not mimic the
    students even at HBCUs like they did many years ago.
    Internally, it's creating--it's not creating the kind of
    relationships that they once had many years ago.
        And last but not least, opportunities. Even when you--at
    every level of the educational journey, students need to have
    opportunities because where they don't have these
    opportunities, they don't necessarily get to reach the level
    that they--to reach their full potential. But if you--you know,
    interests, your preparations, your experiences, and your
    connections impact whether or not you can even access the
    opportunities when they come to you.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. Ms. Whye?
        Ms. Whye. At Intel we learned that what you measure
    matters, and we learned right away that we can't hire our way
    to success. Thank you--that we can't hire our way to success.
    You actually have to focus on retention. We're one of the few
    companies that's actually monitoring our retention and how our
    women not only starting in engineering and engineering careers
    at Intel but how are we being inclusive in our environment and
    creating a sense of belonging so that we can also retain this
    talent.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Mr. Lucas stepped
    out. He will return. In the meantime, I will call on Ms.
    Bonamici. I'm sorry, Mr. Brooks.
        Mr. Brooks. Yes, ma'am. We do have Republicans here today.
        I represent the Tennessee Valley of Alabama, home of the
    Marshall Space Flight Center. We like to call ourselves the
    birthplace of America's space program.
        And, Dr. Jemison, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that,
    to us, you're a hero and a role model having come from the
    Tennessee Valley, Decatur, your birthplace, which is in the
    Tennessee Valley, and we also named a high school after you,
    Jemison High School just a few years ago. So that gives you an
    idea of how highly we think of you and everything you've done
    in your personal life and in your professional career.
        I'd be remiss though if I didn't add that I'm a Trekkie,
    and knocking the ball out of the ballpark was when I found out
    you also were on a role of Star Trek, ``Second Chances,'' so
    that's really cool, OK?
        With that as a little bit of a backdrop, here's a question
    for you if you don't mind. In your testimony you highlight the
    demand for skilled technical workers, STEM jobs that do not
    require a 4-year degree. You also mentioned that women and
    underrepresented minorities are frequently unaware and left out
    of pathways to these careers. What can be done to improve the
    awareness and participation in these programs, and is there a
    role for industry to play?
        Dr. Jemison. Thank you very much for the question. My
    father worked on Redstone Arsenal as a roofer before I was
    born, so he was part of it, too.
        Thank you for the question about skilled technicians and
    skilled labor, which actually do represent the majority of the
    STEM workforce. And in addition to that, they're very high-
    paying jobs and women very frequently do not know about them.
    And we also have a workforce shortage in those areas.
        What can we do? We can, first of all, make people aware of
    them by actually having those jobs represented in television
    programs. When we talk about this--right now--we always talk
    about 4-year degrees. I was busily writing notes about that. We
    talk about 4-year degrees. We talk about academia, but the
    workforce that actually built the Shuttle were not 4-year
    degree engineers. They were skilled technicians. So we need to
    make sure that those jobs are represented.
        Then we have to make sure--I believe that community
    colleges have the ability to do vocational work and are not
    seen as a sort of a remedial place for what was not done in
    high school so that people can get into 4-year colleges.
    Actually, community colleges do incredible work with training
    technicians.
        Vocational education in high school could also be a pathway
    for people seeing and understanding what are some of the jobs
    that are available to them.
        And I just want to go back to something that is really
    clear. During World War II, women fulfilled many of the jobs
    that were considered masculine jobs from, you know, the iconic
    image of Rosie the Riveter. They also were the ones who
    transported airplanes around. We need to understand that women
    can do not only the biotechnician jobs, but that they can also
    do the jobs in mechanical, welding, and building aircraft.
    Those things are important. So thank you for that question. But
    we need to get that out front and keep it in our eyesight.
        Mr. Brooks. I've got some facts I want to give. I don't
    know if we're going to have time for a question or not, but
    this is rather troubling to me. And I just did this research
    while I was sitting here. One was a comment by Don Lemon that a
    put a fact then analyzed, and it was out-of-wedlock births. And
    then looking at STEM and degrees and which races are going into
    STEM. And it seems that there's an unusual correlation. Let me
    run through it.
        Asian Americans, they are number one with the lowest number
    of out-of-wedlock births, and this is according to the National
    Center for Education Statistics at 17 percent out-of-wedlock
    births. They are also number one in terms of number of STEM
    degrees at 33 percent of the degrees that are given out to
    Asian Americans. Caucasian Americans were number two in out-of-
    wedlock births at 29 percent, and then number two in STEM
    degrees at 18 percent. Hispanic Americans were number three in
    out-of-wedlock births at 53 percent and number three in the
    STEM degrees at 15 percent. Native Americans were number four
    out-of-wedlock births at 66 percent and number four in STEM
    degrees at 14 percent. And then African-Americans were number
    five at 73 percent out-of-wedlock births, and that's what
    caused PolitiFact to look into Don Lemon's statements because
    that's what he said. And number five in STEM degrees.
        I hope that we can somehow or another as a body, Madam
    Chair, also look into this societal issue and see what can be
    done given this rather startling correlation between out-of-
    wedlock births and then people who then go thereafter into STEM
    degrees. And my time is expired.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Ms. Bonamici.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Johnson and
    Ranking Member Lucas, and thank you to all of our witnesses.
        We often talk about our global leadership here in the
    United States and that we have a country of innovators. And we
    know that part of that is because of the groundbreaking
    research that we have invested in, but we also know that we
    need to educate the next generation to be innovative, to be
    cutting-edge. I also serve on the Education Committee where
    right now we're talking about affordable college and retention.
    That's why I am back and forth.
        But, Dr. Jemison, you said in your testimony, excellent
    education must be universal. That's all connected to what we're
    talking about here today. But we also know that it's not enough
    just to educate world-class engineers, technologists, and
    scientists. We need critical thinkers who are creative, who can
    come up with new ideas and new ways to solve problems. So I am
    the Co-Chair--Founder and Co-Chair of the STEAM (science,
    technology, engineering, arts, and math) Caucus, will continue
    to advocate for integrating arts and design into traditional
    STEM fields to increase the competitiveness and the diversity
    of our workforce.
        Ms. Whye, I appreciate your reference in your testimony to
    the value of Intel support for STEAM. For students to be
    successful in the modern economy we want to teach them to think
    creatively, and I think I want to point out that in the
    district I'm honored to represent we have about 20,000 Intel
    employees. There's a nationally recognized public STEAM
    elementary school not too far away.
        So we know that historically our science and technology
    workforce has not been inclusive of women and people of color.
    We heard a lot about that from the witnesses about the
    persistent biases and inequities. We know how that's limiting
    us because diverse voices help identify problems to tackle and
    help find new ways to solve them.
        So according to the recent report from the National
    Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, 58 percent of
    individuals in academia experienced sexual harassment.
    Unfortunately, the prevalence of sexual harassment in the
    sciences often undermines career advancement for women in STEM
    fields, and I'm proud to support the Chairwoman's bill to
    direct the Federal science agencies to implement policy changes
    to address sexual harassment. I thank her for her continued
    leadership.
        Dr. Malcom, in your testimony you mentioned the engagement
    of AAAS in the Societies Consortium on Sexual Harassment, and I
    wonder has the consortium developed any new guidance, and what
    can Congress do to make sure that we're not losing the valuable
    scientific contributions from women in STEM because of an
    unsafe working environment?
        Dr. Malcom. Thank you very much for that question. AAAS is
    engaged with the American Geophysical Union, the Association of
    American Medical Colleges, and Education Council in this 100-
    member consortium, and we have our colleagues from mathematics
    and from all the other--many of the other fields there within
    this member group.
        We are actually developing draft policies right now so our
    constituent member societies can have options about what they
    do about different issues. It extends all the way from having
    policies that allow us to affect behaviors, for example, in our
    conferences. If someone--if they've demonstrated that the--you
    have a bad actor there, to be able to--how do we manage that in
    a way that we can in fact have a code of conduct for our
    meetings.
        Ms. Bonamici. Right, and I'm going to try to get another
    question in real quickly.
        Dr. Malcom. Oh.
        Ms. Bonamici. Dr. Jemison, you mentioned the ongoing
    National Academies of Science study addressing the barriers for
    advancement. Through my work on the Education and Labor
    Committee, we've made progress on addressing some of those
    barriers, but I'm concerned about our lack of understanding of
    issues regarding the retention of women and people of color. So
    I'm going to ask you and Ms. Whye, we know the cultural changes
    and willingness to confront the implicit and explicit biases in
    the workforce are essential, but what policy changes can
    Congress explore to improve the retention of women in STEM/
    STEAM fields?
        Dr. Jemison. So the report coming out in November we are
    very excited about, and has some more concrete ideas, but
    really quickly, part of it is holding people accountable for
    what they do and doing bias training----
        Ms. Bonamici. OK.
        Dr. Jemison [continuing]. And recognition as part of
    perhaps tenure processes, as part of processes for promotion so
    that it is ingrained into the culture.
        Ms. Bonamici. Right. And, Ms. Whye?
        Ms. Whye. So quickly, I think where there is leadership,
    accountability, and transparency of data anywhere you have the
    opportunity to be transparent with your data and also holding
    leadership accountable for the barriers that exist for women is
    where you can support.
        Ms. Bonamici. And you have--you call it a hotline or a warm
    line or something?
        Ms. Whye. A warm line. We actually have a warm line service
    that we implemented inside Intel. It's an innovative service
    that employees that are challenged by being retained inside the
    company can reach out to these case managers and get assistance
    right away so that we can retain them inside of Intel. Over
    20,000 cases, we have over 80 percent save rate of our
    employees.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. My time is expired. I yield back.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Mr. Lucas.
        Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Dr. Moore, we often hear in this Committee about the
    importance of mentorship and applied learning opportunities
    like internships, apprenticeships. And you recommend that
    colleges look to increase the amount of quality faculty-student
    mentorship and research experiences to keep students in STEM.
    Can you please elaborate on your recommendation and provide
    some examples of how programs at the Federal science agencies
    could support those activities?
        Dr. Moore. Thank you for the question. Well, there's a new
    initiative at the National Science Foundation called GRIP
    (Graduate Research Internship Program), and basically that
    initiative is trying to give individuals opportunity to have
    real-time experiences, as we know that having real-time
    experiences is one of those factors--when I say real-time
    experiences, apprenticeships, internships, co-ops. They allow
    individuals to go deeper in their content area, and not only
    that, they begin to explore new opportunities that further
    engage their interest in those kinds of things.
        At Ohio State we have an initiative. It's a Big Ten
    consortium called the Summer Research Opportunities Program,
    and some of the institutions have a focus on STEM. Ours is a
    little bit more broad, but a majority of the participants are
    STEM majors.
        We know academic achievement is highly correlated with a
    relationship that a student has with his or her major
    professor, as well as the number of contact hours. Having
    research experiences is a strong indicator of whether or not
    you'll go to graduate and professional schools. And those kind
    of experiences, too often students foreclose on exploring these
    opportunities because--based on what they think research is, so
    it's very important--we know that when women and other
    underrepresented groups have hands-on experiences, they're more
    likely to stay in those kinds of activities.
        So part of the university enterprise should really be
    thinking about how do we develop an academic experience that
    goes beyond the didactic but it has the experiential pieces.
    And as I indicated in my earlier remarks, we're trying to do
    that with J.P. Morgan Chase as a testbed where they come and
    actually have office hours, and they're going to be engaged
    with our students ongoing so they can develop the skill--the
    workforce skills ongoing.
        And particularly some students, when they come from
    communities where they're the first in their families to go to
    college or they're pioneers, sometimes they don't know the
    importance of participating in these kinds of activities, so we
    need--it's very important that we get diverse faculty so we can
    begin to shatter myths and share realities and be role models,
    but also it's important that we have support systems in place
    in our institutions of higher learning that further support
    students and help them guide them in certain places.
        I'm here--you know, I like to share that at Ohio State
    we've only had seven Rhodes Scholars in our history and, you
    know, three were in the early 1900s, but the last two came out
    of my office, and they came from parents of immigrants. And so
    those things just don't happen. You can be very bright, have
    high aptitude, and still don't perform at an optimal level. So
    it's important that we build these kinds of things in the
    curriculum.
        Mr. Lucas. Absolutely. Dr. Jemison, workforces needs across
    the country for aerospace and technicians are great, including
    Oklahoma, and many good-paying jobs are going unfilled. Women
    are particularly underrepresented in the aerospace field. Could
    you expand for a moment on the barriers to women in aerospace
    and how we should address that?
        Dr. Jemison. Many times it's the perspective that people
    have about who does what jobs, what they've seen visibly
    whether it's in media where they see the professors, that makes
    a difference. When you look at workforce, though, many of the
    jobs that you see in aerospace, they have machinists there,
    people who are riveting stuff, putting things together, and
    these have been jobs that traditionally people don't think of
    women as doing, but yet girls do as well as or actually better
    than boys in math and science all the way through high school,
    and many of these jobs are filled with people coming out of
    high school.
        And then there are apprenticeship jobs. So, we have to
    actively bring in girls out of high school into these
    apprenticeship kinds of programs because that's going to make a
    difference and let them know that, yes, this is a part of what
    you can do. What's really important about that is those jobs
    pay well, and so women who put so much money into their homes,
    into their children, would have even that much more to support
    the future.
        Mr. Lucas. Absolutely. I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Mr. Cohen?
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Financial aid is real important for folks in diverse
    populations to go to college. In Tennessee we have a lottery
    that's dedicated to higher ed, and part of the lottery is
    merit-based and some of it's need-based. How important is it
    for these scholarship programs--and if you have them in Ohio
    and if you're familiar with them in other States--to be need-
    based in addition to merit-based and getting students the
    opportunity to go to college? I don't know who should go first,
    maybe Dr. Moore because you're--I know you're at The Ohio State
    University.
        Dr. Moore. Well, as you all--you know, Ohio State is a
    land-grant university, and staying true to that mission our
    President Michael Drake has made--as a major part of his
    platform is to make college more affordable. In fact, I'm proud
    to say Ohio State is one of the national leaders. And so for
    every Ohio resident, we cover cost for tuition for every--every
    Pell-eligible student at Ohio State, and it just went to our
    regional campuses. And that is a--we've invested over $100
    million into this, but I can say it's still not enough.
        Mr. Cohen. What are the results that you've seen from that?
    Have you seen higher graduation rates?
        Dr. Moore. Oh, yes, our graduation rates are still on a
    vertical trajectory, but not only that, as our institution
    historically we've had attention between land-grant and
    flagship. We're both. And so our average ACT is a 29.2, and
    some alums will say I couldn't even--we became--we were open
    admissions prior to 1987, and so it used to be your birthright
    if you had a high school diploma in Ohio you could go to Ohio
    State, but now it's more difficult to do that.
        But what we found is not only when you have students, they
    all have the capability, but they all don't come in with the
    same kind of supports and traditions in their families. And
    what we've done is we've put a major emphasis in creating
    support structures for our students to ensure that they are
    successful and so they won't--first-generation college students
    oftentimes make unwise academic decisions not because they're
    not smart. It's because they rely on the same people who are
    just like them who had the same amount of knowledge. And what
    we try to do is to reach out to students early and we try to
    coach them ongoing to ensure that they're very successful. But
    the financial piece is critical, but it's not the only piece
    because it only covers tuition.
        Ms. Whye. Yes, let me just chime in here. I think it's
    critically important because for some of the students it
    creates a choice for them studying versus having to work, so
    the scholarships--and you'll see in my written testimony we
    have a project with AISES (American Indian Science and
    Engineering Society), which provide scholarships for our Native
    American students. And in doing so, that scholarship helps them
    in a couple ways. One, they get paid internships at Intel, but
    also because they're having the paid internships, they're not
    having to really choose between studying and also having to
    work, so it's critically important.
        Mr. Cohen. Dr. Malcom, please.
        Dr. Malcom. Let me say that sometimes the amount of money
    that we're talking about is not really a lot. It is not
    necessarily just the cost of tuition. It may be that in fact
    the students need book money but they don't have it at the
    time, in which case they delay getting it--getting their books
    until they could earn the money or whatever it is in order to
    do it. Well, that puts you behind.
        And there's also an increased number of students who are in
    fact employed--working full-time who are also trying to go to
    school, and that's a more difficult row to hoe. I am a Regent
    at Morgan State and I chair the Finance and Facilities
    Committee, so I see the kinds of things that come across
    about--that can really stop students right in their track, for
    lack of $500 for the books or $1,000 to be able to become
    financial. So it's really a very critical thing that needs to
    be looked at across the board.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you.
        Dr. Espinosa. I might just add to the point that several
    have made. Many institutions are experimenting with having
    emergency funds available. For many low-income students, books,
    and other critical needs for an education can be out of reach
    because they have to spend money on repairing their car because
    that's the only way they can get to school or they have to
    spend money on their family. So having emergency dollars
    available out of the financial aid office is also a really
    effective strategy.
        Mr. Cohen. All right. Have you noticed any----
        Dr. Jemison. May I----
        Mr. Cohen. Yes, Dr. Jemison.
        Dr. Jemison. I just wanted to add one thing. There is this
    romantic notion about working your way through school, and
    people have done that. But the reality is that it is not
    necessarily fair when those students are working and in classes
    with people who do not have to work their way through school.
    And our responsibility as a Nation is to make sure people have
    access and opportunity to develop their talents that we're
    going to need, all of us, in the years to come.
        Mr. Cohen. My time is up, and I thank each of you for your
    testimony. And it's what I--you know, we need to have more
    need-based scholarships and people understanding that if you
    give people a step up, it's really important not only for them
    but for the whole society. Thank you.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. Mr. Biggs.
        Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I
    appreciate you and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing
    today. It's been very insightful. I appreciate all the
    witnesses being here. I've read your testimony and listened to
    your testimony carefully. I appreciate it very much.
        And it's good to see, Ms. Whye, you're here representing
    Intel, which is so important to my community and my
    congressional district, and thank you. And I only want to say
    this with regard to Dr. Moore and The Ohio State University.
    Oddly enough, the largest engineering school in the country is
    right there at Arizona State University, so I just had to get
    that out, no competition from me, though. I just wanted you to
    know that.
        I am grateful that you're here. I always prefer--and most
    people on this Committee have heard me say this before--that
    the States and the private sector rather than the Federal
    Government take the lead on a lot of the issues we're talking
    about, particularly in expanding STEM opportunities. But I'm
    confident that regardless of how we get there, I think all of
    us in this room share the same end goal.
        In order to remain internationally competitive, it is
    critical that an increasing number of American students are
    able to keep up with and actually in my mind ideally outperform
    students from China, Western Europe, and elsewhere in the
    developed and developing world. The data suggest the United
    States has made great strides over the past decade even though
    we have a long way to go, particularly in the postsecondary
    level.
        According to research compiled by the National Center for
    Educational Statistics, graduate enrollments in science and
    engineering grew 15 percent over the past 10 years.
    Additionally, Latino, African-American, and female
    participation in graduate STEM education increased by 122
    percent, 35 percent, and 37 percent, respectively over the same
    period. Certainly, there's more work to be done, particularly
    in K-12 education, but this seems to indicate we may be moving
    in the right direction.
        And going back to this private sector for moment, I think
    so many efforts to encourage STEM and diversity hiring should
    originate in the private sector. And I appreciate Dr. Moore
    mentioning what J.P. Morgan Chase has done to assist Ohio State
    University, but clearly, Intel has been a real leader in this
    area. The statistics speak for themselves. An 8.5 percent
    growth in female workforce and 17.7 percent growth in the
    number of historically underrepresented minorities just between
    2015 and 2018 alone. Those accomplishments are testaments to
    your leadership, Ms. Whye, and also Intel.
        And I also wanted to thank Dr. Jemison for her comment with
    regarding 2-year schools and their ability to turn out very
    accomplished technicians in the STEM field. We use those and we
    see them in my district.
        Boeing has many machine shops around my district filled
    with a diverse portfolio of workers because they've reached out
    and teamed up with community colleges.
        I'm most interested in learning a little bit more about the
    Tech Learning Lab and Intel Futures Skills programs that you
    referenced in your testimony, Ms. Whye, and I'm wondering if
    you could give us a little more insight into your own
    engagement with these programs and share with us why you think
    they've been so successful at encouraging more young people to
    pursue STEM education.
        Ms. Whye. Thank you. And I'm from the University of South
    Carolina, the other USC, and currently working on a Ph.D.
    obviously at Arizona State University, so I got to give it up
    for AZ.
        Just two things. So what's important about both of these
    programs and all of the programs that Intel is currently
    driving, it's really about access and opportunity because in
    every corner of our communities, even like the rural community
    that I grew up in, there's a student there waiting to be
    engaged. And I think far too often we talk about the narrative
    of the students aren't interested when, quite frankly, the
    students are interested. It's on us to bring the STEM and STEAM
    to these students.
        So both the Tech Learning Labs as well as the Intel Future
    Skills, these programs are put in place to do that, to ensure
    that in our communities and to ensure that communities around
    the Nation, that we can give access to these students so that
    they are developing the critical skills that they will need to
    compete in this Nation and to help Intel with its future
    workforce.
        So, specifically, the Tech Learning Lab, you could think of
    it as a really cool bus that's driving through the rural
    communities in your neighborhood, and that bus is equipped with
    all sorts of fun technologies that you can just geek out.
    That's kind of the visualization for that.
        The Intel's Future Skills program is very similar in that
    it gives the students hands-on skills and entrepreneurship
    skills so that they can do hands-on because the research--and
    Dr. Jemison will agree with this--it's easier for our students
    to see it if they can actually touch the technology and do the
    hands-on project. So it's a very easy way to give our students
    access, and I think all of us could play a role in that and do
    more of that.
        Mr. Biggs. Thank you very much. My time is expired.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Mr. McAdams.
        Mr. McAdams. Thank you, Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking
    Member Lucas, for your leadership on the STEM Opportunities Act
    to build our American workforce and to include more Americans
    in our STEM careers.
        Utah, my home, is also home to several life sciences and
    medical companies, medical device companies, a robust
    technology sector, and an ecology that provides unique
    opportunities for environmental research. When I talk with
    business and university leaders in Utah working in this wide
    range of STEM fields, the top concern that I hear is about
    their ability to recruit the bright students and the workers
    that they need to keep their organizations and not to mention
    our country globally competitive.
        Utah has amazing community partners working to address
    these needs, including our higher education institutions like
    Salt Lake Community College, which has partnered with local
    Title 1 junior high schools to sponsor robotics teams and to
    provide more hands-on STEM learning to students. And businesses
    in Utah's Silicon Slopes area like Adobe, which has engaged
    students from the Ute tribe in workshops designed not only to
    teach tech skills but also encourage their creativity and
    passion for further learning, which I was interested in your
    comments about scholarships to Native Americans.
        We certainly have more work to do in each of our
    communities and in Congress to ensure that all students have
    the opportunity to study STEM and to pursue a career in
    innovative and well-paying STEM fields.
        So my first question is to Ms. Whye, and thank you for your
    testimony. Your testimony notes that retention is a key issue
    for Intel's and other STEM businesses' workforces, and I can
    tell you that I regularly hear the same thing from employers in
    my district. And, you know, certainly we need to do more to
    educate and train that workforce, but once we do get them into
    the workforce, to retain them and keep them in the workforce.
        So I'm interested from your private-sector experience at
    Intel, what programs or practices have helped Intel to create a
    more inclusive workspace for your employees from
    underrepresented backgrounds.
        Ms. Whye. Great, thank you. At its simplest for your
    employees from their point of view, they walk into your
    companies as if they are a bank. Negative transactions result
    in withdrawals from the bank. Positive transactions result in
    deposits. So at Intel what we learn is when our employees are
    at insufficient funds, they call our warm line. And the warm
    line services there is backed by case managers, and employees
    get to ask their questions about their pay, their managers. It
    could be they're ready for the next job assignment. And through
    using this innovative service--and I think all companies should
    have a warm line, all universities should have a warm line.
    And, in fact, the warm line equivalent for me at my university
    was the engineering program office, right? You agree?
        And so what we've learned about retention is really two
    things. Because we've had this warm line in place, over 20,000
    cases now, we now have predictive analytics that can tell us
    what we're doing right and what we're doing wrong. And the two
    top themes from the warm line are employees want to progress
    and they want to have a good connection between them and their
    manager.
        Based on those predictive analytics, what Intel has then
    done is we've retrained all 13,000 of our managers so that they
    have the leadership muscle to ensure that they're creating the
    right inclusive environments for their employees.
        Mr. McAdams. So you started on my second question, which is
    what kind of--type of training do you give to managers? In my
    experience as an employer as county executive before coming to
    Congress and we had 4,000 employees and leadership starts at
    the top, too, right?
        Ms. Whye. Yes, absolutely.
        Mr. McAdams. Create the environment, but what type of
    things do you do----
        Ms. Whye. Yes, so we----
        Mr. McAdams [continuing]. For your managers?
        Ms. Whye. We have an in-house training that's called
    Managing at Intel. One of the modules in that training is how
    to lead as an inclusive leader. It's based on the content of
    Amy Edmondson, creating a psychologically safe environment for
    employees to bring their voices to the table and how you can
    facilitate as a leader and be a coach as a leader as opposed to
    not allowing your employees to be heard. That would be one very
    specific example.
        Mr. McAdams. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield
    back.
        Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. Mr. Baird?
        Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to all the
    very talented witnesses that we have here today. I appreciate
    it very much.
        My first question goes to Ms. Whye. You know, many of our
    universities have programs designed to promote diversity in
    STEM. Purdue University, for example, has a Division of
    Diversity and Inclusion, and each department has their own
    diversity program as well, including a Women in Science program
    at Purdue's College of Science and the Minority Engineering
    Program in their College of Engineering.
        So my question to you is, you mentioned some of the
    programs that Intel has been able to use to create a more
    diverse STEM workforce. How do some of the things I just
    mentioned above like at Purdue--are you able to work with those
    programs? Are they beneficial to getting people into the STEM
    programs?
        Ms. Whye. Absolutely. So we have strong partnerships with
    several universities, and what I would say about it is it's not
    enough to get the talent in the door at Intel. So we haven't
    had huge obstacles getting the talent into Intel. Our obstacles
    have been more around the retention and inclusion of talent
    once the students, women and underrepresented minorities, enter
    into Intel. So we actually did a study inside of Intel to make
    sure that we could get to the root of what were some of the
    specific challenges in the way of retaining talent at Intel and
    asking our employees who are staying at Intel what's at the
    root of them staying.
        And I think we can all agree on some of those critical
    elements. It's really largely around having an inclusive
    environment where I feel a sense of belonging. That's
    critically important. The second thing is to have a sense of
    community, so inside of Intel we have about 29 employee
    resource groups so that individuals can have a place--a safe
    landing to ask some of their difficult questions. And then I
    think the third thing is just the leadership and the leadership
    accountability, which is what I spoke about in my written
    testimony about how we are training managers to be more
    inclusive.
        Mr. Baird. Thank you. My second question goes to Dr. Moore
    and, you know, since we're getting these university priorities
    corrected, I just wanted you to know, maybe you're not aware
    that Purdue University considers The Ohio State University as
    our eastern campus. I'm watching you recover from that.
        This year, I introduced with my colleague and Chairwoman of
    the Subcommittee on Research and Technology, Ms. Haley Stevens
    the Building Blocks of STEM Act. And this legislation would
    work to ensure that NSF provides research and insight into STEM
    education during early childhood and particularly for girls.
        So my question to you, Dr. Moore, is one of the lessons you
    brought up was that students in the underserved communities are
    often unprepared for college-level STEM work. Do you think
    there is a real gap in the pipeline for our young children's
    STEM education, and if so, what should we do to address that
    gap?
        Dr. Moore. Certainly. You know, ZIP Codes do matter
    currently unfortunately. You know, when I was talking about
    Shelby and Omari, Shelby grew up in Beverly, Ohio, but I didn't
    finish. Even though she had struggles, we kind of supported her
    through our office, and she's now a Ph.D. student at the
    University of Cambridge in the U.K., right? And so, thank
    goodness we have an institution like what we have to support
    students and help them reach their dreams and aspirations. And
    Omari is a constant on the Dean's list, even though--so great
    minds come from every ZIP Code.
        I think first and foremost our society has to believe that.
    And how we can coach, everybody needs coaching. I know
    Congressman Gonzalez, the former NFL star, Buckeye football
    player, and Coach Drexel coached him up no matter how good he
    was. And so I'm saying that that's the philosophy we have is
    that we want students to reach optimal success regardless of
    whether you're a fifth-generation college student or whether
    you're going to be the first-in-your-family college student.
        I think when we talk about we have to change the whole
    ecosystem, and we know when families sometimes may not be able
    to play a part, our schools used to play a part. But now our
    schools are fragile, our communities are fragile, and it's
    making it very difficult. So our land-grants, our public and
    private institutions of higher learning, they are required to
    do even more. But not only that, we can't do it by ourselves
    without industries and community because they play a--it is a
    part of the ecosystem.
        And so some of the students, when you're first, you have
    anxiety about being the first. You're going places that no one
    has ever been before. And sometimes you don't know how to ask
    for help. And it's not because--even when they have a 4.0,
    Shelby was one of the top students in her high school, but you
    come to Ohio State, you're talking about any given day we got
    100,000 people near our campus, and it can be quite
    overwhelming if you don't have the right support. So we're
    working on that not only for students, incoming freshmen, but
    we're even working on it how will we do a better job with our
    transfer students.
        When you go to schools that may not have all the resources,
    the 2-year college route is becoming another--a preferred route
    to get to Ohio State and Purdue and other places. And so our
    institutions of higher learning have to do more.
        But I will say this. I would be remiss, there's no
    federally funded program that's probably been more impactful
    for broadening participation than the Louis Stokes Alliance for
    Minority Participation. What might be an idea how could we
    think about that and expanding it, I have--our grant is $4.5
    million. We have 10 universities, 10 universities trying to
    share $4.5 million. It's very--it's not a lot of money. But
    thinking about how do we leverage what we all do to make an
    even greater impact.
        Mr. Baird. Thank you. I think I'm out of time unless----
        Dr. Jemison. I just want to add, and I don't know if this
    is out of order, but to add something about the question of
    childhood and what happens as we get children through it. We're
    mistaken sometimes when we believe that we have to get students
    interested in science. We come out of the chute excited about
    science. We're picking up the bugs, the snails, the stuff in
    the couch. We're asking what it is. What happens many times is
    children go to school, instead of using this prodigious
    construct for learning that all children have, it's very well-
    documented for childhood, we demotivate them. We take the
    energy away by teaching science in a way that just isn't
    science. It's really about hands-on.
        Besides parents, the most impactful part of this is
    teachers. And many teachers in K-8 have not had science as a
    specialty. And so we have to really make sure that we look at
    teacher training. And again, I want to just go to the idea of
    teacher certification, how do we support that so that teachers
    actually are able to do the work that maintains a student
    interest that helps them to build the kind of resilience that
    they need to continue through? If we do that and build science
    literacy, then we will have the pipeline, the resilient
    pipeline that we need to go into skilled labor, 4-year degrees,
    or post-doctorate degrees.
        Mr. Baird. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mrs. Fletcher [presiding]. Thank you. I'll now recognize
    Mr. McNerney for 5 minutes.
        Mr. McNerney. First of all, I want to thank the panel for
    coming today and for your work in this area. It's important.
        STEM programs form a cornerstone of the United States'
    educational system and were created to ensure that the United
    States remains competitive in the global marketplace. However,
    data shows that there is a growing gap in STEM-related
    educational achievements between men and women. While women
    earn over half of college degrees in the United States, they
    hold only 28 percent of STEM-related jobs.
        That's why I plan on introducing the Getting Involved in
    Researching, Learning, and Studying of STEM Act--that's the
    GIRLS STEM Act--which, combined with this bill under discussion
    today, will help address this inequality. My legislation would
    help establish a program in the United States Department of
    Education to provide grants to eligible local education
    agencies to assist elementary and secondary schools in
    encouraging and preparing female students in STEM careers. This
    would ensure that more female students participate in and have
    access to STEM educational opportunities. And you know we're
    leaving out a large block of very qualified, very talented
    people that would help enhance our economy and our national
    security, so it's very important that we do this.
        Dr. Jemison, in your testimony you highlighted several
    barriers to women in STEM. Included in this list is less access
    to mentoring and higher service expectations. With so few women
    in leadership positions, how can we balance the need for these
    women to serve as mentors and role models and to make sure
    their voices are heard without putting too much of a service
    burden on them?
        Dr. Jemison. So the comment that has been made a couple of
    times is how important mentorship is and mentorship being
    people who care about your careers and help you see new
    opportunities. And very frequently mentors who are similar to
    you are most effective, yet it can be very effective where
    others mentor you as well. And so there needs to be some onus
    put on everyone in academia or other professions that they have
    individuals that they're responsible for in terms of making
    sure that they are brought into the system.
        So when I joined NASA, I was the first woman of color to go
    into the astronaut program, and I had a big brother who helped
    me to sort of navigate what was going on, and that made a
    difference. And so I think that part of the way we decrease the
    burden on women of color and women, period, is by making sure
    that everyone has a responsibility. In fact, we could say that
    it is the Department Chair in academia who should have the
    responsibility for making sure that postdocs are coming in,
    that students are coming in, and are actively mentored by
    people who already have tenure, so to shoulder that burden.
        So if you're a woman and you're in an academic institution
    and then you're asked to do all the work around women and
    community and keeping them in, and yet at the same time you're
    having to do all your tenure work as well and you get no credit
    for the community work, and maybe we can also look at how we do
    a credit for community work. There are many type of ways----
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you. I only have 5 minutes, so----
        Dr. Jemison [continuing]. And it's something that we need
    to do.
        Mr. McNerney [continuing]. I'd like to get to another
    question.
        Dr. Jemison. Thank you.
        Mr. McNerney. Dr. Moore, are there policies and practices
    that you have found to be effective in increasing participation
    of women and underrepresented minorities in STEM at Ohio State
    that you believe could be practiced at other institutions?
        Dr. Moore. Many of our academic units have mentoring
    programs specifically for women, but not only that, we try to
    create a community for women where they can draw on and share
    resources, but not only that, what we're finding and right now
    we're in this process of trying to revisit our benefits around
    leave, family leave that--which is a big component that
    sometimes women opt out of the academy particularly at the
    professor level. But also we're thinking about other mechanisms
    in which we can begin to keep people in the profession.
        The other piece in regard to what we know that has been
    very supportive is when you have representation, diverse
    faculty attracts diverse students. When you look at the faculty
    who tend to graduate the most women, they typically are women.
    And I think that's why most of us do it the opposite. We focus
    on the students rather than the faculty, but the faculty is--
    plays a critical role in whether or not you get a Ph.D. or a
    graduate degree because they make selections and grants, et
    cetera.
        The advanced grant is the big grant that we--we have an
    ADVANCE program on our campus, and what they constantly do is
    present best practices, exemplary practices that we can use on
    campus. But the new initiative is we have programs specifically
    for the male faculty because sometimes we have implicit biases.
    We communicate differently sometimes that sometimes alienate
    our women colleagues, so we have lots of programs like that on
    campus.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Mr. Gonzalez
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding
    this important hearing.
        The beauty of tech in my opinion or one of the beauties of
    tech is that we know for sure from experience and data suggests
    this, that diverse viewpoints and diverse experiences help us
    build better technology. I ran a technology company, and it was
    clear the more diverse we were--and we did a great job on
    this--the better our products were, the easier it was for us to
    serve our customers. And so I think the fact that this has
    become a national imperative in many senses is fantastic.
        My first question will go to my friend Dr. Moore. There's
    been a lot of crazy talk on who the real OSU is here. I mean,
    would you agree that the real OSU is Ohio State?
        Dr. Moore. Affirmative.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you. Now that we've got that out of the
    way, and frankly I want to commend you. I am so proud of you
    and the university, as I was reading your testimony and
    listening to you today, to know that Ohio State is working so
    hard on this and you're getting it right. I couldn't possibly
    be happier sitting in this chair, so I just want to thank you
    and everybody at the university for the work that you're doing.
        I think the anecdotes that you shared are really powerful
    because we're talking about two totally different backgrounds,
    but ultimately, we're kind of driving toward the same goal. And
    you have different programs, which makes perfect sense.
        I want to read a part of your testimony. You mentioned--
    ``We found that family influence and encouragement, positive K-
    12 academic experiences, their own interests and aspirations in
    STEM, as well as their academic experience in colleges with
    peers were all crucial impacting factors in African-American
    male achievement.'' It strikes me--and I've heard this echoed
    before. It strikes me that the family influence part is maybe
    the hardest at the university level to kind of, I guess,
    encourage. I guess I'd ask the question to you and to anybody,
    how can we do a better job--and not just to the African-
    American community but broadly--of making sure that our parents
    and kind of local leaders are promoting STEM as well?
        Dr. Moore. Well, what we do through our Young Scholars
    Program, we recognize not only are you educating the child,
    you're educating the family as well. In the State of Ohio we
    survey all 12th graders across race, gender, urbanicity, et
    cetera, and when you ask what individual has been most
    influential in your educational/career aspirations every year,
    it's families.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Yes.
        Dr. Moore. So families are influencing your child whether
    they went to college or whether they didn't go to college. And
    so it's very important that we recognize the importance of
    families.
        And even when they have a college education, what we do,
    what we're very proud of, we have the only center that focused
    on African-American males in the United States, and I'm here to
    say I'm proudly--when I first started we only had about 130
    African-American males who had a cumulative 3.0 or better. And
    today, we have 692 out of 1,291, nearly 50 percent of our
    African-American males on our campus, athletes or nonathletes,
    have a cumulative 3.0 or better.
        And what we've found is talent--there are certain things
    that play out in our school systems--I'm not trying to be
    sexist or any of that kind of--that plays out for different
    groups just like we hear my colleagues talk about women. But
    minority males have similar experiences that sometimes they--
    it's suppressed, and that impacts their educational outcomes.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Yes. Thank you. And then shifting to Dr.
    Malcom, so a 2018 recent report published by National Academy
    of Science, Engineering, and Medicine mentions that 50 percent
    of women faculty and staff at academic institutions report
    having been harassed. We talked about this yesterday. You all
    weren't here but this was a topic of conversation yesterday in
    this hearing. And the simple question I've asked now for the
    fourth time and I think, you know, we're getting close to being
    able to produce something is what--how can we do better? What
    can we possibly do to make sure that we're cutting those
    instances down, and how can we foster an environment that is
    more conducive to women? I mean, we should just eradicate this
    from STEM if we could, right? So I'll open it up to you.
        Dr. Malcom. I think that right now what we're seeing is
    trying to operate on multiple tracks, trying to look at the
    issue of preventing harassment, not just dealing with it once
    it's there.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Right.
        Dr. Malcom. How do we change the culture, that is, within
    institutions with regard to graduate students and postdocs so
    that when they come through the system that they understand
    that this is not a good thing in terms of supporting the
    environment for STEM.
        And the professional societies have stepped up in terms of
    saying that--in terms of our fields that we do not think that
    harassment has any place within our fields. For the disciplines
    themselves to say that this is not to be tolerated is a major
    point of movement, and we are very pleased to see that.
        Mr. Gonzalez. Fantastic. Thank you, everybody, and I yield
    back.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Ms. Hill for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Hill. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
        Dr. Moore, the relationship between a faculty advisor and
    his or her students, including graduate students and postdocs,
    is highly imbalanced in terms of power. I'm really proud of the
    number of women who are entering--young women who want to enter
    STEM--the STEM field. This is happening in my district. We're a
    huge aerospace center in my district and biotechnology, and so
    we're seeing more and more young women who want to get into
    that space, but we still have these huge inequities and
    concerns around the balance of power.
        Most STEM faculty manage that imbalance carefully and
    respectfully but abuse also happens with little recourse for
    students. If the student just quits or even if she reports
    through official channels, her entire career may be derailed.
    Minority, female, and first-generation college students are
    especially vulnerable.
        This actually happened to a woman who has worked for me
    before who was in--she was working in a lab at her university,
    and it was pervasive sexual harassment happening from her
    advisor. Many women quit, they left. Finally, they stood up and
    said that this was enough, they got together, they coordinated
    around it. It went through the entire process at the
    university, and at the end of the day, after going through
    everything, the public exposure, et cetera, the man, the
    advisor got 2 days off and that was it.
        So direct sources of funding from fellowships such as the
    NSF Graduate Research Fellowship give graduate students more
    autonomy, but that helps just a tiny fraction of all STEM
    trainees. What discussions are underway about policies to
    better protect trainees and, more importantly, to reduce the
    incidence of abuse of power altogether?
        Dr. Moore. Well, I can tell you what is mandatory. We just
    created newly--we just made the announcement. We just hired
    someone at Ohio State, a new office called the Office of
    Institutional Equity, and it's going to focus on those very
    things that you highlighted. But not only that, it is now, as
    Dr. Malcom was indicating, a major milestone for our
    university. It is mandated, it is a requirement that all
    faculty, all staff, all students have to take mandatory
    training. And that's a major milestone.
        And not only that, people have blind spots, and it's very
    inappropriate, and sometimes people, they've been socialized,
    they've been doing things for a long time, and they carry out
    in places to where it was--it was inappropriate from the get-
    go, and it--and they're doing it in public spaces that may
    isolate individuals. So we're hoping that the training and not
    only that this office is going--in this office, the person
    reports directly to the Provost because we wanted to
    communicate to the university community that this is a serious
    affair and we want it to stop.
        Ms. Hill. Dr. Malcom, yes.
        Dr. Malcom. Yes. I want to also indicate that I think our
    agencies now are also stepping up. When at times it has been
    verified that there is a serious, credible allegation, removing
    that person from a PI responsibility from actually interacting
    with the rest of the space, the people in the space, I think
    that seeing that the National Science Foundation and the
    National Institutes of Health are beginning to move on those
    issues is a real step forward because it's sending a very
    different signal than we have had in the past, that in fact if
    you get lots of grants that the behavior might be tolerated
    because of the money impact that it actually has on the
    institution.
        Ms. Hill. Thank you so much. Do any of the rest of you want
    to weigh in? You want to chime in? Sure.
        Dr. Jemison. I was just going to comment from the work that
    we're doing with the National Academies' women's study for
    increasing participation. One of the issues we have to talk
    about is that the power relationship between the faculty
    advisor and the candidate is so strong that it's a place where
    everyone should hold it as an egregious attack on the academia
    when faculty members abuse that position. And in fact the idea
    of holding their funding from the agencies accountable would
    make a really big difference because money does push things
    along. And if the agency said if you have those kinds of
    issues, we're not going to fund you, it would make a big
    difference.
        Ms. Hill. So would you see a student, for example, who
    doesn't feel like they get proper recourse from the university
    or the lab itself having an ability to go to the funding
    source?
        Dr. Jemison. Well, I think that there should be
    transparency and a requirement from the funding sources to say
    what has been going on to show that you have procedures in
    place for other kinds of requirements--government
    requirements--that you are not harassing----
        Dr. Malcom. Other compliance.
        Dr. Jemison. Other compliance--that's the term--that you're
    complying with not harassing students.
        Ms. Hill. Thank you. I know I'm out of time. I yield back.
    Thank you so much.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Mr. Balderson
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all for
    being here this morning.
        Dr. Moore, thank you very much. I appreciate your time
    here. It's always good to see constituents.
        And one of the issues that drives the skills gap we are
    seeing is the access to just basic broadband. We talk about
    broadband, but let's talk about basic broadband. As you all are
    certainly aware, if you lack access to the internet in 2019 you
    are at a huge disadvantage in developing marketable skills. Of
    the 24 million Americans that do not have basic broadband
    internet access, 83 percent live in the rural communities.
    Could you each talk about what your organizations are doing to
    ensure rural communities have an equal opportunity to succeed?
    Dr. Moore, if you would start, please.
        Dr. Moore. Well, first of all, thank you for the work that
    you do. And this is a very important topic. It's a part of our
    ethos at Ohio State because we are a land-grant university. And
    many of our extension programs work aggressively to ensure that
    opportunities are available to our rural constituents. In fact,
    all 88 counties in Ohio, they're guaranteed at least one full
    ride in every county in the State of Ohio.
        We provide a lot of outreach, but not only that, another
    example of it is, as you know, that the opiates crisis has
    plagued many of the rural areas in the State of Ohio, and Ohio
    State is providing leadership to address those issues. But we
    know some of it is a lack of opportunities, and that's probably
    one of the biggest gears is to ensure that individuals have
    opportunities in those areas.
        But not only that, with our access and affordability grant,
    it's ensuring that students won't foreclose on trying to come
    to Ohio State because they can't afford it. We're trying to
    make it even more affordable. So we have regional campus, we
    have the Columbus campus, and our regional campuses, they
    also--we just recently started access and affordability. It's a
    lot cheaper on the regional campus, and plus, we have these
    grant opportunities. So we want to make education accessible to
    our students.
        Ms. Whye. Go ahead.
        Dr. Espinosa. Go ahead.
        Ms. Whye. I'll just talk about our Navajo Nation project.
    We have three schools that we're partnering with just north of
    Phoenix, Arizona. We provide culturally sensitive curriculum,
    and we also--what we haven't talked about today a lot is the
    importance of a collective impact arrangement so that industry
    plus academia plus other companies can come together because
    it--not one company can do it alone. So in the case of the
    Navajo Nation, we've partnered with Cisco, who actually helps
    to bring the broadband to those schools that we're partnering
    with because we think that's also important.
        Dr. Espinosa. So just to put a number to it, one in six of
    the Nation's undergraduate students attend rural colleges and
    universities, and I think this is a group that goes under-
    discussed and underserved. I like that you brought up the
    partnerships that exist between tribal colleges and
    universities and local business and industry as a way to serve
    those communities, which are often located in rural areas.
        Another thing that we're doing at ACE is trying to shine a
    light on what are called education deserts, so these are places
    where educational access is limited in terms of higher
    education. There may be no options, there may be one or two
    options, and one of the two might be too expensive or out of
    reach for some of these students.
        In addition to broadband, I think we've discussed satellite
    campuses, also the ability for community colleges located in
    these areas to have dorms where students can live. It's not
    common to have dorms at community colleges, but many of these
    deserts have that as their offering, and some of these
    institutions have built residences.
        I'll say one more thing about the power of dual enrollment
    in these areas, and that's another role of community colleges,
    which is to provide dual enrollment for the high schools in the
    region, which allows those students to have a more promising
    path to go to the flagship in that State or a 4-year
    institution.
        Dr. Malcom. We fully recognize the power and the importance
    of technology now and how it can actually provide access that
    wasn't possible before. And it isn't just to rural communities,
    actually to urban ones as well. We have poverty places
    everywhere.
        And I think that in our case in the case of AAAS what we
    have done in the past is always to try to not necessarily
    design for the broadband. We tried to design for the lowest,
    most ubiquitous technology that we can find, and that often
    means that you're doing things on phones because that's what
    people have. And I think that we need to look across the
    spectrum as we are really seeking the opportunities until we
    can get better.
        Mr. Balderson. Thank you all very much. And, Dr. Moore, as
    you and I know, Beverly, Ohio, where the young lady is
    succeeding in getting her Ph.D. is from a very rural area, so I
    yield back my time. Thank you.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Mr. Casten for
    5 minutes.
        Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to the panel.
        Dr. Jemison, I think we you an apology because with all of
    this talk about OSU and ASU, there has been no recognition of
    the Thayer School of Engineering where I got my graduate degree
    from at Dartmouth College. And I think particularly in this
    panel on inclusion, the historic underrepresentation on today's
    panel is duly noted.
        On a more serious note, I served for about 10 years on the
    Corporate Collaboration Council at Thayer, and we were very
    proud of the fact that it was the first undergraduate
    engineering school in the country to reach gender parity. I
    spent 16 years as the CEO of a clean energy company and was
    fairly proud of the fact that merit doesn't discriminate, we
    didn't either and, for totally selfish reasons, we had a
    diverse workforce. And for totally unwelcome reasons, when you
    treat all people with decency, people who have not been treated
    with decency elsewhere give you more loyalty than you probably
    deserve, and there are greedy reasons to do that, and I would
    hope we would all do that.
        I mention that not out of looking for praise acknowledging
    a limitation, which is that in neither of those institutions
    did the diversity that we had reflect the diversity of the
    country. It reflected the diversity of the applicant pool. And
    you cannot discriminate, and I'm glad you all mentioned
    intentionality in your conversations that we have to get to,
    and I want to start with Dr. Espinosa. In those higher
    education institutions, I had a phenomenally diverse student
    body that I went to school with and later, you know, had some
    kind of a mentorship role with. It was largely diverse in the
    international sense because that reflected the diversity of our
    applicant pool. What do we need to be doing at the primary
    education level to help ensure that the diversity of applicants
    more accurately reflects the diversity of this country?
        Dr. Espinosa. All right. Well, it all starts there, right?
    It all starts where students start their journeys, which is at
    the primary school level. I think there's a lot more that
    higher education can do to reach that far down. Many admissions
    offices, when they are doing outreach--and I know this because
    I'm a former admissions officer myself--really focus at the
    high school level. And by the time students get to high school,
    they're already on an educational path that determines where
    they will go to college and what they will study in college.
    And this is especially true in the STEM disciplines.
        So some of the promising activities that I've seen on
    college campuses include more of a focus on making sure that
    they're providing a pathway maybe not to their institutions,
    certainly to their institution but to higher education overall
    by focusing their activities and their outreach and the work
    that they do with teachers and others that serves students in
    these spaces, that they also focus there, in addition to the
    pool that they get coming out of high school.
        Mr. Casten. Thanks. If I could sort of move up the
    educational chain, Dr. Moore, you made the point earlier about
    sort of hiring people who look like the students and helping
    with retention, which I wholeheartedly support. I'm curious,
    Dr. Jemison, given some of the diversity of institutions you've
    been involved with, are there any that strike you as being
    really sort of exceptional best practices from the higher
    education level at both reaching down to attract people and
    then making sure that we retain them?
        Dr. Jemison. So let me just sort of say that one of the
    issues is exposure. Having students exposed to the range of
    activities, the range of things that are included in STEM
    disciplines. I want to comment on Dartmouth and Thayer School
    of Engineering not only reaching parity in the number of women
    engineers but actually I think one year actually more women
    graduated. And part of that was the kind of education that's
    given at the school, which has a liberal arts requirement for
    the engineers, and they also have a lot of projects, which
    really work with people seeing the application.
        But I believe it's exposure. I cannot tell you of a
    university that necessarily does things best. I can go back and
    say that when universities allow students to come in on their
    campuses and grade school, when they're in their early high
    school years, it makes a difference. When programs are held
    that purposely include students, it makes a difference.
        But the one program I want to mention was something called
    the Junior Engineering Technical Society, where they would
    bring in junior high school students to the University of
    Illinois at Champaign-Urbana and expose them to engineering for
    2 weeks. It makes a really big difference because all of a
    sudden you know that these careers exist.
        Mr. Casten. Thanks. With a little bit of time, Ms. Whye, if
    you could just quickly chime in then from the employer side,
    the applicant pool, you know, if you aren't with--intent looks
    a lot like those of us on this panel and--unfortunately. And
    there are things that Intel can do as a large company, and yet
    so many of our companies are small employers. What's your
    advice to small employers who may not have the size of your
    H.R. department to reach out with intent?
        Ms. Whye. Yes. So there's a saying that likes likes likes
    and likes also tend to hire likes. So one of the easiest things
    to do would be to develop an inclusive hiring methodology. And
    we have this inside of Intel, and what it looks like is the
    applicant pool is diverse and inclusive. The interviewers on
    the other side are also diverse and inclusive, and inside Intel
    you also have to post a formalized req. We find far too often
    that jobs are secured through the network or through tapping,
    so where you can formalize the structure, be inclusive in your
    hiring pool, to your great point, and also have diverse
    interviewers that's reflective of that pool on the other side,
    that action in and of itself has increased our ability to get a
    more diverse talent.
        Mr. Casten. Thank you. I yield back my time.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. I'll now recognize Mr. Waltz for
    5 minutes.
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you so much for being here today. This is
    a critical issue to me. This is a critical issue for my
    district and I think for the national security of this country.
        I represent the 6th District of Florida, north Florida, and
    spent our Easter work period visiting Daytona Beach State
    College where they have a vocational and STEM training program,
    also Pine Ridge High School, where we had a skills forum, but
    then Cookman, which is a historically black college that
    received university status in 2007 located in Daytona Beach,
    and of course Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
        I appreciate everyone's thoughts today at how to get at
    this and how to do this better. I just want to emphasize--
    again, I'm also on the Armed Services Committee. We are dealing
    with a situation abroad where we need to combat extremism both
    abroad and at home but also our near-peer and our peer
    competitors in China and Russia, and STEM is critical to both.
        And I have said and will continue to say that when we look
    at the extremism problem, where women thrive in countries
    abroad and in communities here where they are thriving in civil
    society, where they're thriving in politics, where they're
    thriving in business, extremism doesn't. It's squashed. So we
    just need to get this out of the domestic, I think, forum and
    get us squarely as a national security issue. I want to know if
    you all agree with me there, number one.
        And then, number two is we're looking at the 21st century
    space race, which is near and dear to what we're dealing with
    in the Florida and also in the Armed Services Committee. We
    don't have a workforce and we're not creating a workforce to
    compete, and that is alarming. We're going from half-a-trillion
    dollars in our space economy to $2.7 trillion. That will be
    dependent on space. The average person touches space dozens of
    times a day and doesn't even realize it, whether it's banking,
    markets, navigation, you name it.
        So question one for you. The Administration issued a report
    charting the course for success, America's strategy for STEM
    education. I don't know if you've had a chance to see that
    December 2018. If you have had a chance to see it, I'd love to
    know, Dr. Malcom, I see you nodding your head yes. What do you
    agree with, what do you think could be improved, what are your
    thoughts on the strategy the Administration just put out?
        Dr. Malcom. There are two major points to the strategy. One
    is the focus on workforce, and the other is the focus on
    diversity. And I would absolutely agree with both of them. I
    think that the major issue is, though, how do we get there. And
    I think pulling the pieces together across our agencies is
    necessary, but it's not sufficient. The STEM workforce is a
    national workforce, and yet we basically don't think nationally
    when we do this.
        In Ohio, they look at The Ohio State University, but they
    also look at Ohio University and Akron and Toledo and all the
    community colleges that--to fill in that space. And I think
    that this notion about how do these pieces come together is the
    reason that I have basically focused on a strategy to try to
    operate at scale because we can't do this just one piece at a
    time. And I do hope that we will start to focus in on how that
    piece actually overlays with these larger issues of pulling the
    rest of the pieces together.
        Mr. Waltz. Do you think the report does a sufficient job at
    describing programmatically how the Federal Government can help
    and assist States get at this issue, or do you think it's
    lacking, or where----
        Dr. Malcom. I think that----
        Mr. Waltz. I think--where----
        Dr. Malcom [continuing]. It's not enough.
        Mr. Waltz. Federally, what can we do from this position? I
    understand the States have a huge role, universities, academia,
    local, and personally, I think that's where education decisions
    should be made. But what can we do to support specifically just
    in the time that I have--or reinforce that we're already doing?
        Dr. Malcom. Well, I think that a lot of the programs that
    are already in place are--actually need to be kind of revisited
    in terms of how they help the institutions put the pieces
    together, but I also think that the business community has a
    major role to play----
        Mr. Waltz. Completely agree.
        Dr. Malcom [continuing]. As a partner in all of this and
    try to put these strategies together in a way that is really
    coherent. And some of that is I think part of the intention
    around INCLUDES (Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of
    Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and
    Science) from the National Science Foundation, but again, it is
    necessary but it is not sufficient.
        Mr. Waltz. I think we're doing a great job here of
    describing the problem. I would love any follow up you could
    send to my office on specific solutions that you've seen that
    are effective or ones that we're currently frankly throwing
    resources at that are ineffective.
        Dr. Malcom. I----
        Mr. Waltz. I certainly welcome that.
        Dr. Malcom. I look forward to it.
        Ms. Whye. So just one specific idea, and it's in my written
    testimony and maybe outside the scope of this Committee, but
    one low-hanging fruit I believe is encouraging the Defense
    Department to leverage its ROTC (Reserve Officers' Training
    Corps) program to help build a stronger diverse workforce and
    tapping into that talent pool. So, for example, the Junior ROTC
    that serves about 500,000 students, secondary students, most
    often they're very diverse and underrepresented minority
    students. By being able to go to that talent pool and bringing
    STEM and IoT, Internet of Things or cybersecurity as a
    curriculum to those students I think is a very low-hanging
    fruit item.
        Mr. Waltz. I think it's a fantastic idea, and thank you for
    that. I yield my time.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you.
        Mr. Waltz. I am over time. Thank you. I appreciate the
    Chairwoman's indulgence.
        Mrs. Fletcher. I'll now recognize Mr. Lamb for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Lamb. Thank you. And I'll actually be happy to pick up
    right where you left off, ma'am, because I was just at a JROTC
    graduation on Saturday night in my district. I love those
    programs, and it's nowhere near as large or widespread as it
    should be. And really what I've seen in my short time in office
    is sometimes it's actually more privileged and well-off schools
    that are hosting these programs because of the resources that
    they have, and so they're doing excellent work, but we need to
    see it spread to the places that really need it the most.
        So I don't know if you had anything else you wanted to say
    about your experience with JROTC, but what I've seen
    especially--and as a Marine, I hate admitting this, but the Air
    Force programs that I've seen are awesome because they really
    focus on the aerospace science at an early age, you know what I
    mean, and Marines don't worry as much about complicated science
    I guess. But go ahead.
        Ms. Whye. No, what I would just say there is back to Dr.
    Malcom's point about scale, and so I think what we have to do
    is we have to look at where we have existing infrastructure
    already ready there and in place for us to tap into. So for all
    of us in high school, there were clubs that we were all a part
    of, science club, math clubs, taking the curriculum that we
    know is important for these students to get these critical
    skills and moving those critical skills into those clubs until
    we can get those critical skills into the curriculum of K-12.
        I mean, if we wanted to get it right, we could start by
    changing the curriculum in K-12. But absence of that, until we
    can catch up, we could insert that into these places like
    Junior ROTC, the math club, the science club.
        And the students will tell you this, my experience working
    with Intel and our science fair, they know that more money is
    going to the athletic clubs in comparison to their science
    clubs, so I think the more we can work from that and work on
    that is also very helpful.
        Mr. Lamb. Thank you. Dr. Jemison, I see you want to jump
    in. I wanted to ask a related question anyway. Before I do
    that, I also want to say another existing institution that I
    think we forget about sometimes in these discussions is the
    role of labor unions, which has been an enormous force for
    progress on behalf of people of color for a very long time. And
    many of these jobs are STEM jobs, you know, electricians,
    steelworkers, sheet metal workers.
        So I know you focused a little bit, Dr. Jemison, on the
    role of apprenticeships and opportunities short of a 4-year
    degree. Have you seen what I'm talking about with the role of
    especially some of our more hands-on labor unions and
    apprentice programs in the building trades?
        Dr. Jemison. So I wanted to follow up particularly around
    the military and its capacity to actually train individuals who
    are skilled technicians and part of the skilled labor force. In
    fact, so many of the jobs in the military, whether you talk
    about in the Air Force or I know Navy Staff Sergeants, too----
        Mr. Lamb. Just rubbing it in, yes.
        Dr. Jemison. But also----
        Mr. Lamb. All the other----
        Dr. Jemison. But if people knew, women knew, girls knew,
    coming out of high school about the opportunities that are
    available in the military to be trained in some of these kinds
    of professions, it would make a big difference in the fact that
    those professions actually make more money than some of the
    ones that they're geared to. And so if the military actively
    recruited women into those jobs, it would make a difference and
    also help them to develop a pathway.
        In terms of labor unions, and labor unions have been
    fantastic in some cases. In some cases, because of the
    apprenticeship program, they have been a hindrance as well
    because this is, again, one of those things where--what did you
    use, the term like and like, right?
        Ms. Whye. Yes, like and like.
        Dr. Jemison. And so we have to have the conversation with
    labor unions as well so that they start to broaden their focus
    and their view.
        Mr. Lamb. Thank you. Last question also for you, Dr.
    Jemison, just because of your background, we found out when the
    White House submitted its budget this year that they thought we
    should cancel out the funding for NASA's Space Grants program,
    which is a relatively small part of the overall NASA budget,
    extremely small actually, and what it does is provide grants
    throughout the educational system to encourage people but
    especially underrepresented minorities, women, people of color
    to go in to train them to become astronauts or to study
    aerospace.
        And we actually had a great example of this in my home
    State of Pennsylvania where a recipient of a Space Grant
    program award eventually became an astronaut just a couple of
    years ago, I think maybe the first female astronaut from
    Pennsylvania, a Penn State graduate. And so it just seemed to
    me like a very successful program that was working at an
    extremely low cost, and I was surprised that the Administration
    advocated that.
        Are you familiar with this program at all or have you met
    people who have benefited from it?
        Dr. Jemison. I'm not very familiar with it. I have met
    people who have been involved with programs. But what I wanted
    to add onto that is there has been this push recently for the
    executive branch to pull funding for science education away
    from agencies, so it was going to be solidified under the
    Department of Education, and yet the Department of Energy,
    NASA, they all have very fundamentally important and powerful
    science education programs that have done wonderful work over
    the years. They cannot be replicated under the Department of
    Education.
        So one of the things I think it's vital for us to do is to
    understand that these organizations offer something that the
    Department of Education can't, and removing the small, as you
    said, amounts of money from those organizations is not going to
    benefit the country at large. In fact, it's going to hurt.
        Mr. Lamb. Thank you. Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. And now, I will recognize myself
    for 5 minutes to ask a few follow-up questions.
        I really want to thank all of the panelists for being here.
    I think this has been one of the most informative and engaged
    panels, which is also why I let some of the answers run over
    because we really get to the interesting stuff when we hear
    from you and about your ideas.
        For me as the aunt of a niece in high school who wants to
    become an engineer for--as a Representative from Houston whose
    second piece of office art in my office here on the Hill is the
    Women of NASA LEGO series that came at the same time as the
    Whataburger table tent from Texas, two critical items of office
    decor.
        I am so pleased to have this group here and to hear from
    all of you. And I represent the energy capital of the world,
    and this is something I hear from companies across my district
    and employers across my district, that there is a real need for
    people in STEM fields and that we need to be bringing our
    students along, that we need to have an emphasis on basic
    science and very advanced science, and that's what we do in my
    district. So I've been really interested to hear all of your
    ideas.
        And, Ms. Whye, you talked a little bit about partnerships.
    I wrote lots of notes about these important words,
    partnerships. Dr. Moore, you talked about the ecosystem and,
    Dr. Jemison, you talked about teachers and mentors. Dr. Malcom,
    when you were talking about the agencies, Dr. Espinosa, all the
    ideas of these interesting ways we all need to work together,
    and I think that that's a critical theme.
        So knowing that we just have a few more minutes I was
    actually going to ask about the ROTC idea because that is such
    a great idea, and so I want to make sure that there's nothing
    that you all had in your written testimony that we haven't
    covered today that you would recommend as best practices or
    policies that we should hear and keep in this record of our
    hearing, any ideas of things that you didn't get to touch on in
    the questions already that you would recommend, especially for
    my district from companies to be able to broaden STEM
    participation. That continues to be a critical, critical issue.
    But anything else that anyone wants to add in terms of
    partnership ideas or final thoughts, I welcome those.
        Dr. Jemison. I just want to make a comment about public-
    private partnerships. I've worked with Bayer Corporation for
    over a decade on their Making Science Make Sense program, which
    is about science literacy. And they have created curriculum-
    changing programs like ASSET, but also programs that look at
    skilled education like the Bay Area Biotech Partners, which
    started with at-risk students in Berkeley, and these students
    graduated as certified biotechnicians. At-risk meaning that
    they were not expected to graduate. But these are the things
    that can happen with public-private partnerships.
        And, as Ms. Whye said, it wasn't just about Bayer. It then
    started to encompass all of the biotech companies in the Bay
    Area. So there is a rich capacity of companies to participate
    across the spectrum from K-12 all the way into college and
    postdoc.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you.
        Ms. Whye. I'll just call out one more and kind of staying
    with the collective impact arrangement because I think it's
    important for--in the private partnerships and also in the
    industry, the academia partnerships. It's also important for
    those partnerships to align toward a very specific outcome and
    also put in the diligence to have an owner, whether it's one of
    the companies, or if it's a third-party organization that is
    responsible for helping those partnerships come together and
    align around a very specific set of measurements and making
    sure that they're meeting on a cadence that they can go back
    and track those measurements to make sure they're getting that
    work done.
        One such partnership that we have right now is called the
    Reboot Representation. This is kicked off by Melinda Gates and
    her organization called Pivotal Ventures. In that is multiple
    companies, but we're all working toward doubling the number of
    women of color in computer science degrees by 2025.
        Now, each of us may do different parts and bring in
    different dollars, but the machine is going toward the same
    destination. And I think sometimes in the partnerships, the
    partnerships are going in different directions, so we need to
    partner with a specific outcome on the other side. And in that
    partnership, by pooling all the resources together, you can
    then choose the right proposals that can push you toward the
    right outcome.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you. Anybody else?
        Dr. Espinosa. I would just add in terms of partnerships, we
    have a very extensive discussion of public-private partnerships
    in the report that I talked about today. We also talk about
    incenting institutions to partner with one another, and that's
    really important when it comes to graduate education. And the
    reason we did this work on minority-serving institutions is
    because that's where the students of color are.
        So if we want to see more students of color in these
    graduate programs that we've touched on today, we need to
    create a pathway, and many institutions are doing this already,
    but really incentivize the pathway to the doctorate coming out
    of not only the 4-year minority-serving institutions but
    starting with community colleges, which is really where the
    majority of students of color enroll. So it's also the
    connectivity across the institutions where they can further
    learn from one another in undertaking this effort, so that
    would mean creating consortiums and collaborations so that that
    learning is taking place.
        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you very much. I see that I've gone
    over my allotted time, so before we bring the hearing to a
    close, I want to thank you all again for testifying before the
    Committee today.
        The record will remain open for 2 weeks for additional
    statements from Members and for any additional questions that
    the Committee may ask of all of you as the witnesses.
        You are now excused, and the hearing is now adjourned.
    Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 12:19 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                   Appendix I

                                  ----------

                       Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  Appendix II

                                  ----------
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]