[House Report 107-133]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Rept. 107-133
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
======================================================================
NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT
_______
July 11, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Boehlert, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 100]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.
100) to establish and expand programs relating to science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology education, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as
amended do pass.
CONTENTS
I. Amendment.......................................................1
II. Purpose of the Bill.............................................6
III. Background and Need for the Legislation.........................6
IV. Summary of Hearings.............................................7
V. Committee Actions...............................................8
VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill.........................9
VII. Section-By-Section Analysis (By Title and Section).............10
VIII. Committee Views................................................11
IX. Cost Estimate..................................................12
X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................13
XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)...........14
XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations...............14
XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement.............................14
XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................15
XV. Congressional Accountability Act...............................15
XVI. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law.........15
XVII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported..........15
XVIII.Committee Recommendations......................................15
XIX. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives..........15
XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence...........................16
XXI. Proceedings of Subcommittee Markup.............................17
XXII. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup...........................72
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Science Education Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) As concluded in the report of the Committee on Science of
the House of Representatives, ``Unlocking Our Future Toward a
New National Science Policy'', the United States must maintain
and improve its preeminent position in science and technology
in order to advance human understanding of the universe and all
it contains, and to improve the lives, health, and freedoms of
all people.
(2) It is estimated that more than half of the economic
growth of the United States today results directly from
research and development in science and technology. The most
fundamental research is responsible for investigating our
perceived universe, to extend our observations to the outer
limits of what our minds and methods can achieve, and to seek
answers to questions that have never been asked before. Applied
research continues the process by applying the answers from
basic science to the problems faced by individuals,
organizations, and governments in the everyday activities that
make our lives more livable. The scientific-technological
sector of our economy, which has driven our recent economic
boom and led the United States to the longest period of
prosperity in history, is fueled by the work and discoveries of
the scientific community.
(3) The effectiveness of the United States in maintaining
this economic growth will be largely determined by the
intellectual capital of the United States. Education is
critical to developing this resource.
(4) The education program of the United States needs to
provide for 3 different kinds of intellectual capital. First,
it needs scientists, mathematicians, and engineers to continue
the research and development that are central to the economic
growth of the United States. Second, it needs technologically
proficient workers who are comfortable and capable dealing with
the demands of a science-based, high-technology workplace.
Last, it needs scientifically literate voters and consumers to
make intelligent decisions about public policy.
(5) Student performance on the recent Third International
Mathematics and Science Study highlights the shortcomings of
current K-12 science and mathematics education in the United
States, particularly when compared to other countries. We must
expect more from our Nation's educators and students if we are
to build on the accomplishments of previous generations. New
methods of teaching science, mathematics, engineering, and
technology are required, as well as better curricula and
improved training of teachers.
(6) Science is more than a collection of facts, theories, and
results. It is a process of inquiry built upon observations and
data that leads to a way of knowing and explaining in logically
derived concepts and theories. Mathematics is more than
procedures to be memorized. It is a field that requires
reasoning, understanding, and making connections in order to
solve problems. Engineering is more than just designing and
building. It is the process of making compromises to optimize
design and assessing risks so that designs and products best
solve a given problem. Technology is more than using computer
applications, the Internet, and programming. Technology is the
innovation, change, or modification of the natural environment,
based on scientific, mathematical, and engineering principles.
(7) Students should learn science primarily by doing science.
Science education ought to reflect the scientific process and
be object-oriented, experiment-centered, and concept-based.
Students should learn mathematics with understanding that
numeric systems have intrinsic properties that can represent
objects and systems in real life, and can be applied in solving
problems. Engineering education should reflect the realities of
real world design, and should involve hands-on projects and
require students to make trade-offs based upon evidence.
Students should learn technology as both a tool to solve other
problems and as a process by which people adapt the natural
world to suit their own purposes. Computers represent a
particularly useful form of technology, enabling students and
teachers to acquire data, model systems, visualize phenomena,
communicate and organize information, and collaborate with
others in powerful new ways. A background in the basics of
information technology is essential for success in the modern
workplace and the modern world.
(8) Children are naturally curious and inquisitive. To
successfully tap into these innate qualities, education in
science, mathematics, engineering, and technology must begin at
an early age and continue throughout the entire school
experience.
(9) Teachers provide the essential connection between
students and the content they are learning. Prospective
teachers need to be identified and recruited by presenting to
them a career that is respected by their peers, is financially
and intellectually rewarding, contains sufficient opportunities
for advancement, and has continuing access to professional
development.
(10) Teachers need to have incentives to remain in the
classroom and improve their practice, and training of teachers
is essential if the results are to be good. Teachers need to be
knowledgeable of their content area, of their curriculum, of
up-to-date research in teaching and learning, and of techniques
that can be used to connect that information to their students
in their classroom.
SEC. 3. MASTER TEACHER GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Definitions.--In this section--
(1) The term ``sponsoring school'' means an elementary or
secondary school that employs a teacher who is participating in
a program funded in accordance with this section.
(2) The term ``nonclassroom time'' means time during regular
school hours that is not utilized by a master teacher for
instructing elementary or secondary school children in the
classroom.
(3) The term ``master teacher'' means a mathematics or
science teacher who works to improve the instruction of
mathematics or science in kindergarten through 9th grade
through--
(A) participating in the development or revision of
science, mathematics, engineering, or technology
curricula;
(B) serving as a mentor to mathematics or science
teachers at the sponsoring school or other schools;
(C) coordinating and assisting teachers in the use of
hands-on inquiry materials, equipment, and supplies,
and when appropriate, supervising acquisition and
repair of such materials;
(D) providing in-classroom teaching assistance to
mathematics or science teachers; and
(E) providing professional development, including for
the purposes of training other master teachers, to
mathematics and science teachers.
(4) The term ``mathematics or science teacher'' means a
teacher of mathematics, science, engineering, or technology in
an elementary or secondary school.
(b) Program Authorized.--(1) The Director of the National Science
Foundation shall establish a program to award competitive, merit-
reviewed grants to institutions of higher education (or consortia
thereof) to train master teachers and assist elementary and secondary
schools to design and implement master teacher programs.
(2) Institutions of higher education receiving grants under this
section shall offer programs to train master teachers. As part of such
programs, a grantee shall--
(A) recruit and select teachers to receive training;
(B) ensure that training covers both content and pedagogy;
(C) ensure that participating teachers have mentors; and
(D) assist participating teachers with the development and
implementation of master teacher programs at their sponsoring
schools.
(3) Grants awarded under this section may be used to--
(A) develop and implement professional development programs
to train elementary or secondary school teachers to become
master teachers and to train existing master teachers;
(B) provide stipends and reimbursement for travel to allow
teachers to participate in professional development programs in
the summer and throughout the year;
(C) provide guidance to sponsoring schools to enable them to
develop and implement a plan for the use of master teachers;
(D) support participating teachers during the summer in
research programs conducted at institutions of higher
education, private entities, or government facilities;
(E) provide educational materials and equipment to master
teachers;
(F) provide computer equipment and network connectivity
necessary to enable master teachers to collaborate with other
master teachers, to access educational materials available
online, and to communicate with scientists or other mentors at
remote locations; and
(G) fund any other activities the Director determines will
accomplish the goals of this section.
(c) Selection Process.--(1) An institution of higher education
seeking funding under this section shall submit an application at such
time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Director
may require. The application shall include, at a minimum--
(A) a description of which classroom subjects and grade
levels the training will address;
(B) a description of the activities to be carried out,
including--
(i) how such activities will be aligned with State
and local standards and with other activities that
promote student achievement in mathematics and science;
and
(ii) how such activities will be based on a review of
relevant research and why such activities are expected
to strengthen the quality of mathematics and science
instruction;
(C) a description of how the applicant will ensure the active
participation of its mathematics, science, or engineering
departments in the development and implementation of the
program;
(D) an explanation of how the program will ensure that
teachers are given instruction in both content and pedagogy;
(E) a description of how the applicant will recruit teachers
to participate in the program and the criteria that will be
used to select the participants;
(F) a description of the type and amount of any financial
assistance that will be provided to teachers to enable them to
participate; and
(G) a description of how the applicant will work with schools
to ensure the success of the participating teachers.
(2) In evaluating the applications submitted under this subsection,
the Director shall consider, at a minimum--
(A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the
proposed program;
(B) the experience the applicant has in developing and
implementing high-quality professional development programs for
mathematics or science teachers; and
(C) the extent to which the applicant is committed to making
the program a central organizational focus.
(3) In evaluating the applications submitted under this subsection,
the Director shall give priority to those applications that demonstrate
the greatest participation of mathematics, science, or engineering
departments.
(d) Teacher Eligibility.--(1) To be eligible to participate in a
program funded under this section, a mathematics or science teacher
shall submit to the Director, at such time and in such manner as the
Director may require, an assurance executed by the sponsoring school,
that, after completing the program funded by this section, the
participating teacher will be provided sufficient non-classroom time to
serve as a master teacher. A copy of this assurance must be submitted
to the institution of higher education as part of the teacher's
application to participate in the master teacher program.
(2) No funds authorized by this section may be used to train any
teacher who has not complied with paragraph (1).
(e) Accountability and Dissemination.--(1) The Director shall
evaluate the activities carried out under this section. At a minimum
such evaluations shall use a common set of benchmarks and assessment
tools to identify best practices and materials developed and
demonstrated with funds provided under this section.
(2) The results of the evaluations required under this subsection
shall be made available to the public, including through the National
Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital
Library, and shall be provided to the Committee on Science of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions of the Senate.
(3) Materials developed under the program established under this
section that are demonstrated to be effective shall be made available
through the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology
Education Digital Library.-
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this
section $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
SEC. 4. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ON REQUIRED COURSE OF STUDY FOR
CAREERS IN SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING, AND
TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION.
(a) In General.--The Director of the National Science Foundation
shall, jointly with the Secretary of Education, compile and disseminate
information (including through outreach, school counselor education,
and visiting speakers) regarding--
(1) typical standard prerequisites for middle school and high
school students who seek to enter a course of study at an
institution of higher education in science, mathematics,
engineering, or technology education for purposes of teaching
in an elementary or secondary school; and
(2) the licensing requirements in each State for science,
mathematics, engineering, or technology elementary or secondary
school teachers.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this
section $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
SEC. 5. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT STUDY EVALUATION.
(a) Study Required.--The Director of the National Science Foundation
shall enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences
and Engineering under which the Academies shall review existing studies
on the effectiveness of technology in the classroom on learning and
student performance, using various measures of learning and teaching
outcome including standardized tests of student achievement, and
explore the feasibility of one or more methodological frameworks to be
used in evaluations of technologies that have different purposes and
are used by schools and school systems with diverse educational goals.
The study evaluation shall include, to the extent available,
information on the type of technology used in each classroom, the
reason that such technology works, and the teacher training that is
conducted in conjunction with the technology.
(b) Deadline for Completion.--The study evaluation required by
subsection (a) shall be completed not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Definition of Technology.--In this section, the term
``technology'' has the meaning given that term in section 3113(11) of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6813(11)).
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the purpose of
conducting the study evaluation required by subsection (a), $600,000.
SEC. 6. SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS
EDUCATION CONFERENCE.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the National Science Foundation
shall convene the first of an annual 3- to 5-day conference for
kindergarten through 12th grade science, mathematics, engineering, and
technology education stakeholders, including--
(1) representatives from Federal, State, and local
governments, private industries, private businesses, and
professional organizations;
(2) educators;
(3) science, mathematics, engineering, and technology
educational resource providers;
(4) students; and
(5) any other stakeholders the Director determines would
provide useful participation in the conference.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the conference convened under
subsection (a) shall be to--
(1) identify and gather information on existing science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology education programs and
resource providers, including information on distribution,
partners, cost assessment, and derivation;
(2) determine the extent of any existing coordination between
providers of curricular activities, initiatives, and units; and
(3) identify the common goals and differences among the
participants at the conference.
(c) Report and Publication.--At the conclusion of the conference the
Director shall--
(1) transmit to the Committee on Science of the House of
Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report on the outcome and
conclusions of the conference, including an inventory of
curricular activities, initiatives, and units, the content of
the conference, and strategies developed that will support
partnerships and leverage resources; and
(2) ensure that a similar report is published and distributed
as widely as possible to stakeholders in science, mathematics,
engineering, and technology education.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this
section--
(1) $300,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
(2) $200,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 and 2004.
SEC. 7. DISTANCE LEARNING GRANTS.
(a) In General.--The Director of the National Science Foundation
shall establish a program to award competitive, merit-based grants to
institutions of higher education to provide distance learning
opportunities in mathematics or science to elementary or secondary
school students.
(b) Use of Funds.--Grants awarded under this section shall be used by
institutions of higher education to establish programs under which
elementary or secondary school students can participate in research
activities in mathematics or science occurring at the grantees'
institution via the Internet.
(c) Selection Process.--(1) An institution of higher education
seeking funding under this section shall submit an application at such
time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Director
may require. The application shall include, at a minimum--
(A) a description of the research opportunities that will be
offered;
(B) a description of how the applicant will publicize these
research opportunities to schools and teachers;
(C) a description of how the applicant will involve teachers
of participating students in the program;
(D) a description of how students will be selected to
participate;
(E) a description of how the institution of higher education
will ensure that the research is enhancing the participants'
education and will make it more likely that the participants
will continue their studies in mathematics or science; and
(F) a description of how the funds will be spent.
(2) In evaluating the applications submitted under this subsection,
the Director shall consider--
(A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the
proposed program;
(B) the extent to which the proposed program will enhance the
participants' education and encourage them to continue the
study of mathematics or science; and
(C) the extent to which the proposed program will provide
opportunities that would not otherwise be available to
students.
(3) The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that the
program established under this section serves students in a wide range
of geographic areas and in rural, suburban, and urban schools.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this
section $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) The term ``elementary school'' has the meaning given that
term by section 14101(14) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801(14)).
(2) The term ``secondary school'' has the meaning given that
term by section 14101(25) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801(25)).
(3) The term ``institution of higher education'' has the
meaning given that term by section 101 of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 100 is to authorize appropriations for
science, mathematics, engineering and technology (SMET)
education programs at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and
other purposes. The bill authorizes appropriations of $60.9
million for Fiscal Year 2002 and $60.2 million for Fiscal Years
2003 and 2004.
III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
In 1945 when Dr. Vannevar Bush transmitted his landmark
report, ``Science--the Endless Frontier'', he paraphrased
Harvard President John Conant in making the case for the
importance of a targeted investment in mathematics and science
education as part of a National research policy:
In every section of the entire area where the word
science may properly be applied, the limiting factor is
a human one. We shall have rapid or slow advance in
this direction or in that depending on the number of
really first-class scientists who are engaged in the
work in question. . . . So in the last analysis, the
future of science in this country will be determined by
our basic educational policy.
This analysis is as true today as it was fifty years ago.
Recent studies have shown that the most important factor in
successful educational improvement efforts, especially those in
science, math, engineering and technology, is the skill of
enthusiastic and well-prepared teachers. When integrating the
needs of learners into the context of the emerging needs of the
American workplace and society, the truth of the observation
``teaching is the essential profession, the one that makes all
other professions possible'' is obvious. Teachers provide the
essential connection between students and the content they are
learning. A gifted and well-trained teacher can instill the
excitement of scientific inquiry while anchoring the material
in the context of everyday life.
Thus, high quality teachers must be identified, recruited,
and retained in every school district throughout the Nation. K-
12 science, mathematics, engineering, or technology teachers
should be respected by their peers, rewarded financially and
intellectually, and have sufficient opportunities for
advancement. In exchange, we must expect that all teachers have
mastered their content area, curricula, up-to-date research in
teaching and learning, and techniques that can be used to
connect information to the students in their classrooms.
The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching
for the 21st Century concluded that the most efficient way to
disseminate information about best practices and to improve the
quality of professional development was to train a cadre of
master teachers. These teachers, who must be well versed in the
most effective teaching methods, have demonstrated the ability
to obtain high student achievement, and be able to effectively
use technology for teaching and learning, can assume
responsibility for reviewing and modifying curriculum and
developing and implementing professional development and
mentoring programs for their peers. H.R. 100, the National
Science Education Act (NSEA) responds to these recommendations
and authorizes the Director of the National Science Foundation
to establish a program to provide grants to universities to
train master teachers and for other purposes designed to
improve the instruction of elementary and secondary mathematics
and science education.
IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS
On Wednesday, March 7, 2001, the House Committee on Science
held a hearing to gather teachers' perspectives on how the
federal government can help improve K-12th grade science and
math education. Testifying before the committee were four
teachers representing elementary, middle, and secondary math
and science educators, three of whom were recipients of the
prestigious Presidential Award for Excellence in Science and
Mathematics Teaching. These witnesses spoke to the importance
of improving the quality and availability of professional
development, developing better student assessment tools,
increasing the prestige of mathematics and science teachers,
reducing the professional isolation experienced in the
classroom, and building stronger partnerships between schools
and universities.
On Wednesday, May 2, 2001, the House Science Committee's
Subcommittee on Research held a hearing on ways the National
Science Foundation could most effectively stimulate K-12 math
and science education reform. The witnesses addressed the
central role that higher education, business, and school
district partnerships can play in stimulating science and
mathematics education reform. The witnesses emphasized the
importance of high quality professional development programs,
the important role that the prestige of business partners can
play in encouraging broaderacceptance of reform activities, the
need to recruit better prepared teachers, the important mentoring role
that can be played by master teachers, and the importance of long-term
rather than short-term programs.
On May 10, 2001, the House Service Committee's subcommittee
on Research held a hearing to examine the gap that currently
exists between what is known about how people learn and the
methods and materials educators use to teach. The witnesses
gave testimony to the critical importance of establishing a
long-term research agenda designed to bridge the gap between
cognitive science and education research and to finding better
ways to ensure that the results of this research are
incorporated into teacher education, professional development,
and classroom activities.
V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS
On January 3, 2001, Dr. Vernon J. Ehlers (MI) joined by
seven other co-sponsors, introduced H.R. 100, the National
Science Education Act, a bill to authorize appropriations for
science, mathematics, engineering and technology education for
Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004. The Subcommittee on Research
met to consider H.R. 100 on June 7, 2001, and entertained the
following amendment--
Amendment 1. Mr. Boehlert (NY) offered an amendment in the
nature of a substitute: (1) to revise Section 4, the master
teacher program, by authorizing grants to institutions of
higher education for the purpose of training master teachers;
(2) to revise Section 9, the distance learning grant program,
by providing grants to higher education institutions for the
implementation of K-12 distance learning programs; and (3) to
strike Section 3--Assurance of Continued Local Control, Section
7--Teacher Technology Professional Development, Section 10--
Scholarships to Participate in Certain Research Activities, and
Section 11--Interagency Coordination of Science Education
Programs. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
With a quorum present, Ms. Johnson moved that the
Subcommittee favorably report the bill, H.R. 100, as amended,
to the Full Committee on Science with the recommendation that
it be in order for the amendment, in the nature of a substitute
adopted by the Subcommittee, to be considered as an original
bill for the purpose of amendment under the five minute rule at
Full Committee, and that the staff be instructed to make
technical and conforming changes to the bill as amended. The
motion was agreed to by a voice vote.
On June 13, 2001, the Full Committee met to consider the
bill, H.R. 100, as adopted by the Subcommittee on Research.
With a quorum present, Mr. Gordon moved that the Committee
favorably report the bill, H.R. 100, as amended, to the House
with the recommendation that the bill as amended do pass, and
that the staff be instructed to make technical and conforming
changes to the bill as amended and prepare the legislative
report, and that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring
the bill before the House for consideration. The motion was
agreed to by a voice vote.
VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL
The National Science Education Act, H.R. 100, focuses on
improving elementary and secondary science, mathematics,
engineering and technology education. H.R. 100 would authorize
appropriations of $60.9 million for fiscal year 2002 and $60.2
million for fiscal years 2003 and 2004. More specifically, the
bill--
Authorizes the Director of NSF to award grants to
institutions of higher education (or consortia thereof) to
develop and implement programs to train master mathematics and
science teachers. In order to participate in the program,
teachers must obtain a written assurance from their school or
school district that they will be provided with sufficient
release time to fulfill the responsibilities of a master
teacher. The program is authorized at $50 million for each of
fiscal years 2002-2004.
Authorizes the Director of NSF to compile and
disseminate to students information regarding the typical
prerequisites for middle school and high school students
seeking to pursue post-secondary degrees in mathematics,
science or engineering in order to become teachers. The program
is authorized at $5 million for each fiscal years 2002-2004.
Authorizes the Director of NSF to enter into an
agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to review
studies on the effectiveness of technology in the classroom.
The study is authorized at $600,000.
Authorizes the Director of NSF to convene an
annual business conference on science, mathematics,
engineering, and technology education. The purpose of the
conference is to identify and disseminate model programs
developed or implemented by business for the reform of
mathematics and science education. The conference is authorized
at $300,000 for fiscal year 2002 and $200,000 for fiscal years
2003 and 2004.
Authorizes the Director of NSF to award grants to
institutions of higher education to provide elementary and
secondary school students an opportunity to participate over
the Internet in research projects conducted in laboratories at
institutions of higher education. The program is authorized at
$5 million in each of fiscal years 2002-2004.
Table 1 provides a detailed summary of the authorizations
in H.R. 100.
TABLE 1.--THE NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT
[By fiscal year; in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 Total
Activity authorization authorization authorization authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSF:
Total Grants............................ 55.0 55.0 55.0 165.0
Total Other............................. 5.9 5.2 5.2 16.3
Grants:
Master Teacher Grants................... 50.0 50.0 50.0 150.0
Distance Learning Grants................ 5.0 5.0 5.0 15.0
Other:
Course Dissemination.................... 5.0 5.0 5.0 15.0
Study Evaluation........................ .6 ............... ............... ...............
Business Conference..................... .3 .2 .2 .7
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... 60.9 60.2 60.2 181.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
Cites the Act as the ``National Science Education Act.''
Section 2. Findings
The Committee finds that: (1) the United States must
maintain its preeminent position in science and technology to
advance human understanding and to improve the lives of all
people; (2) the growth of the economy depends upon continued
scientific and technological research; (3) economic growth is
possible only through intellectual capital and education is
instrumental to developing this resource; (4) educational
institutions must provide for three kinds of intellectual
capital: that needed by scientists, mathematicians and
engineers, that needed by other workers to succeed in a high-
technology workplace, and that needed by the general citizenry
to enable them to make informed and educated decisions as
voters and consumers; (5) student performance on recent
assessments indicates that American students are being
outperformed by their international peers. We must expect more
from American educators and students, and new methods, better
curricula and improved training of teachers is needed; (6)
science, mathematics, engineering and technology are more than
subjects that contain facts to memorized--each is the
foundation of principles that must be applied throughout a
lifetime; (7) science, mathematics, engineering and technology
must be learned by doing; (8) children are naturally curious
and learning of science, mathematics, engineering and
technology must begin early and continue from kindergarten
through high school; (9) teachers are the most essential
component of a successful learning experience and teachers must
be offered a career that is respected by their peers, is
financially and intellectually rewarding, provides continuing
access to professional development and offers opportunity for
advancement; and (10) teachers must have incentives to remain
in the profession and improve their practice and they must be
knowledgeable about their content area, the curriculum, and
effective pedagogical techniques.
Section 3. Master Teacher grant program
Establishes within NSF a master teacher program, which
awards funds to institutions ofhigher education for the purpose
of training science or math teachers to lead instruction and manage
hands-on resources in grades K-9. Grantees must recruit and select
teachers to participate, provide training in both content and pedagogy,
provide teachers with mentors, and assist teachers in the
implementation of master teacher programs in their schools. Authorizes
$50 million for each of FY2002-FY2004.
Section 4. Dissemination of information on required course of study for
careers in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology
education
Requires NSF and the Department of Education to disseminate
to high schools information explaining the high school courses
typically prerequisite to pursuing a college teaching degree in
science and math. Authorizes $5 million for each of FY2002-
FY2004.
Section 5. Requirement to conduct study evaluation
Authorizes an evaluation of studies on the effectiveness of
technology in the classroom for learning. Authorizes $600,000
to be obligated within one year of enactment of this Act.
Section 6. Science, mathematics, engineering, and technology business
education conference
Authorizes NSF to convene a conference to bring together
private sector participants in education. Authorizes $300,000
for FY2002, $200,000 for FY2003 and FY2004.
Section 7. Grants for distance learning
Authorizes NSF to make grants to institutions of higher
education to provide research opportunities to elementary and
secondary school students via the Internet. Authorizes $5
million for each of FY2002-FY2004.
Section 8. Definitions
Defines: (1) ``elementary school'' and ``secondary school''
as defined in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965; and (2) ``institution of higher education'' as defined in
the Higher Education Act of 1965.
viii. committee views
Sec. 3--Master Teacher grant program
The Committee has authorized the Director of the National
Science Foundation to award grants to institutions of higher
education (or consortia thereof) to recruit and train master
teachers. The Committee believes that it is absolutely
essential that master teachers be provided with sufficient
release time from the classroom to allow them to fulfill the
responsibilities of a master teacher (including, developing and
providing professional development for other teachers, leading
curriculum review activities, management of laboratory
materials and equipment). In order to ensure that sufficient
release time is provided, the Director of NSF is required to
secure a written assurance from the school or local educational
agency that employs a teacher participating in the master
teacher program. The written assurance shall guarantee that the
school or local educational agency shall provide the master
teacher with paid release time to fulfill the responsibilities
of a master teacher upon completion of the program.
Sec. 4--Dissemination of information on required course of study for
careers in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology
education
Recent surveys conducted by the National Science Foundation
have revealed that many students fail to understand the
importance of taking mathematics and science courses throughout
their middle and secondary school years. These same surveys
reveal that an alarming number of students who wish to pursue
careers in engineering, medicine, mathematics and science fail
to take the required mathematics and science courses.
Inadequate mathematics and science preparation during a
student's middle school and high school years can have a
profound negative impact on the number and kind of higher
education and professional opportunities available to a
student. The Committee authorizes the Director of NSF to
coordinate with the Secretary of Education in developing a
program to ensure that students and their parents better
understand the importance and consequences of decisions to
pursue or not pursue additional coursework in mathematics and
science.
The Committee believes that hands-on science instruction
will motivate students to pursue careers in math and sciences
and that dissemination of information regarding prerequisite
secondary school courses will be a helpful tool for students
considering careers in teaching. However, none of the funds
authorized to be appropriated in this bill may be used for the
purpose of requiring any individual student to pursue any
particular career.
ix. cost estimate
Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(2) of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report accompanying each bill or joint
resolution of a public character to contain: (1) an estimate,
made by such committee, of the costs which would be incurred in
carrying out such bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year
in which it is reported and in each of the five fiscal years
following such fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of
any program authorized by such bill or joint resolution, if
less than five years); (2) a comparison of the estimate of
costs described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph made by
such committee with an estimate of such costs made by any
Government agency and submitted to such committee; and (3) when
practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level
for the relevant program (or programs) with the appropriate
levels under current law. However, House Rule XII, clause
3(d)(3)(B) provides that this requirement does not apply when a
cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted
prior to the filing of the report and included in the report
pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3). A cost estimate
and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on Science
prior tothe filing of this report and is included in Section X
of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2) of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report that accompanies a measure
providing new budget authority (other than continuing
appropriations), new spending authority, or new credit
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures to
contain a cost estimate, as required by section 308(a)(1) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and, when practicable with
respect to estimates of new budget authority, a comparison of
the total estimated funding level for the relevant program (or
programs) to the appropriate levels under current law. H.R. 100
does not contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or
changes in revenue or tax expenditures. Assuming that the sums
authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 100 does
authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in
the Congressional Budget Officer report on the bill, which is
contained in Section X of this report.
X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, June 21, 2001.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 100, the National
Science Education Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Melissa
Zimmerman and Kathleen Gramp.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 100--National Science Education Act
Summary: H.R. 100 would authorize several new programs at
the National Science Foundation to promote science and
technology in elementary and secondary education. The bill
would authorize approximately $60 million for a year for fiscal
years 2002 through 2004 for these initiatives. Assuming
appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that
implementing H.R. 100 would cost $167 million over the 2002-
2006 period. The bill would not affect direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
H.R. 100 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
This bill would benefit state and local governments, including
local school districts and public universities. However, any
costs incurred to participate in the program would be
voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 100 is shown in the following table.
The cost of the legislation falls within budget function 250
(general science, space, and technology):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Authorized Level.................................... 0 61 60 60 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................... 0 9 36 52 48 22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
authorized amounts will be appropriated for each year,
beginning in 2002. We assume outlays will follow historical
spending patterns for similar programs. Over the 2002-2004
period, the bill would authorized $50 million a year for grants
to colleges and universities to support master teacher
programs; $5 million a year for initiatives related to distance
learning; and $5 million a year for the creation and
distribution of teaching-career information to students. In
addition, H.R. 100 would authorize $300,000 for fiscal year
2002 and $200,000 a year for fiscal years 2003 and 2004 for
annual education conferences and $600,000 for the National
Academies of Sciences and Engineering to evaluate the
effectiveness of technology in the classroom.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 100
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. The bill would benefit state and local
governments, including local school districts and public
universities, by authorizing appropriations to the National
Science Foundation for grant programs designed to improve
science education. Any costs incurred by intergovernmental
entities to participate in grant programs would be voluntary.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Melissa Zimmerman and
Kathleen Gramp; impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
Elyse Goldman; impact on the private sector: Lauren Marks.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4
H.R. 100 contains no unfunded mandates.
XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1) of the House of Representatives
requires each committee report to include oversight findings
and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule
X. The Committee on Science's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement
Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the House of Representatives
requires each report of a committee on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character to include a statement citing
the specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution
to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States
grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 100.
XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement
H.R. 100 does not establish nor authorize the establishment
of any advisory committee.
XV. Congressional Accountability Act
The Committee finds that H.R. 100 does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).
xvi. statement on preemption of state, local, or tribal law
This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or
tribal law.
xvii. changes in existing law made by this bill, as reported
This legislation does not amend any existing Federal
statute.
xviii. committee recommendations
On June 13, 2001, a quorum being present, the Committee on
Science favorably reported the National Science Education Act,
by a voice vote, and recommends its enactment.
xix. statement on general performance goals and objectives
Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of
H.R. 100 are to improve student mathematics and science
achievement in elementary and secondary schools through the
education and training of master teachers, encourage middle
school and high school students to take additional mathematics
and science courses and encourage greater collaboration between
businesses and other education stakeholders.
Section 3 of the Act authorizes the Director of NSF to
provide grants to institutions of higher education to recruit
and train master teachers. It is the performance objective of
this program to improve elementary and secondary school student
achievement by increasing the number and quality of master
teachers that are available to reform curricula, implement
professional development programs, and serve as mentors to
other teachers.
Section 4 of the Act authorizes the Director of NSF to
compile and disseminate information (through outreach, school
counselor education, and visiting speakers, etc.) about the
courses middle and high school students must take to pursue
science, mathematics, engineering and technology education at
institutions of higher education to become elementary or
secondary school teachers. The general performance goal of this
program is to encourage middle and high school students who are
considering careers in teaching to take additional science and
mathematics courses.
Section 6 of the Act authorizes the Director of NSF to
convene an annual conference for kindergarten through 12th
grade science, mathematics, engineering, and technology
stakeholders. The general performance goals of the conference
are to share information about business initiated education
reform programs and to improve collaboration among
stakeholders.
Section 7 of the Act authorizes the Director of NSF to
establish a program to provide distance learning opportunities
in mathematics or science to elementary or secondary school
students. The general performance objective of the program is
to increase student achievement by using distance learning
technologies to provide students with opportunities to
participate in research projects conducted at institutions of
higher education.
xx. exchange of committee correspondence
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC, June 25, 2001.
Hon. John Boehner,
Chairman, House Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Boehner: Thank you for your letter of June
26, 2001 regarding H.R. 100, the National Science Education
Act.
I appreciate your waiving your Committee's right to a
referral on this bill so that it can move expeditiously to the
floor. I recognize your Committee's jurisdiction in this area
and will support any request you may make to have conferees on
H.R. 100 or similar legislation.
The exchange of letters between our two committees will be
included in the Committee report on H.R. 100 and will be made
part of the floor record.
Sincerely,
Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman.
House of Representatives,
Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Washington, DC, June 26, 2001.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Boehlert: Thank you for working with me
regarding H.R. 100, the ``National Science Education Act'',
which was introduced by Rep. Vern Ehlers, referred to the
Committee on Science and in addition the Committee on Education
and the Workforce, and ordered favorably reported by your
Committee on June 13, 2001. I understand your desire to have
this legislation considered expeditiously by the House; hence,
I do not intend to hold a hearing or markup on this
legislation.
In agreeing to waive consideration by our Committee, I
would expect you to agree that this procedural route should not
be construed to prejudice the Committee on Education and the
Workforce's jurisdictional interest and prerogatives on this or
any similar legislation and will not be considered as precedent
for consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my
Committee in the future. I would also expect your support in my
request to the Speaker for the appointment of conferees from my
Committee with respect to matters within the jurisdiction of my
Committee should a conference with the Senate be convened on
this or similar legislation.
I would appreciate your including our exchange of letters
in your Committee's report to accompany H.R. 100. Again, I
thank you for working with me in developing this legislation
and I look forward to working with you on these issues in the
future.
Sincerely,
John Boehner, Chairman.
xxi. proceedings of subcommittee markup
H.R. 100, NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT
----------
JUNE 7, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Research,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
Chairman Smith. To move forward now with the consideration
of Mr. Ehlers' bill, H.R. 100, we will now consider that bill
to establish and expand programs relating to science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology education and for
other purposes. I would now recognize the gentleman from
Michigan, Mr. Ehlers, the author of the bill for five minutes.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I have a
prepared statement but in the interest of time I ask that you
have it entered.
Chairman Smith. Without objection the statement will be
included in the record.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you.
[Statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:]
Opening Statement of Hon. Vernon J. Ehlers
Today we are marking up H.R. 100, the National Science Education
Act, the first of three bills aimed at improving science, math,
engineering, and technology education--known as ``SMET ed.'' H.R. 100
is a similar version to H.R. 4271, which passed this Committee by a
unanimous vote during the 106th Congress. I want to thank Chairman
Boehlert and Chairman Smith for their leadership on this issue.
Our K-12 education system serves three main purposes: it is
responsible for preparing future scientists and engineers for further
study in college and graduate school; it provides all future workers
the basic technical skills they will need in a 21st century workforce,
where nearly every job will have a technical component; and it provides
scientific and technical understanding so that citizens may make
informed decisions as consumers and voters. Unfortunately, recent
international assessments of student performance in science and math
showed that our twelfth grade students were well behind their
international peers.
As most of you know, during the 106th Congress, this Committee
conducted a series of hearings to further examine the state of the
nation's math and science education, and to suggest improvements. While
there are many factors that impact student achievement, a common theme
that arose from our discussions is that there is no substitute for a
knowledgeable and well-prepared teacher in the classroom.
Teachers, particularly at the elementary and middle school level,
often lack time and school resources to implement an inquiry-based,
hands on science curriculum. H.R. 100 authorizes a competitive grant
program for higher education institutions to train teachers with strong
backgrounds in math, science, engineering and technology to become
master teachers. Master teachers would be trained to provide on-going
professional development, in-classroom assistance, and oversight of
hands-on science materials to a group of elementary and middle school
SMET teachers. This is the type of support our teachers deserve and
should be receiving.
In addition, this bill requires NSF and the National Academies to
evaluate existing studies on the effectiveness of technology in the
classroom on learning and student performance. Federal, state, and
local governments have done a good job providing funds for technology
acquisition, but it is unclear what technologies and how technology
enhance student learning.
This bill also creates a program for higher education institutions
to provide distance learning opportunities for elementary and secondary
students. Distance learning invites exciting possibilities for student
learning, particularly for student scientific research.
I look forward to having my colleagues' input today and to
consideration by the full Committee and full House in the future. With
this effort, our nation's teachers and students will be one step closer
to receiving the support they so much deserve.
I would like to close by thanking Chairman Boehlert and Chairman
Smith for working with me to bring this bill forward today.
Mr. Ehlers. I deeply appreciate the interest in science
education on the part of the Full Committee Chairman, Mr.
Boehlert, and the Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Smith. I think it
has been a number of years since we had a combination like
that, and I especially appreciate Mr. Boehlert's deep interest
in promoting science and insuring that our students have a good
opportunity to learn science when they are in elementary
schools and that we will have an adequate number of trained
citizens in the future.
I also appreciate that we now have a President who has made
education a high priority and naturally, science education is
part of that.
We all recognize, I believe, as the Subcommittee Chairman
mentioned during his comments that today's economic boom is
largely related to the work that we have done in science and
technology and the discoveries that we have made there.
What most people in this nation do not recognize, however,
is the role of improved education in providing the workforce
for that economic boom and also the continuing research to keep
it going. And that is the purpose of this bill and the previous
bill.
Expressing it in three specific purposes, number one, we
want to make sure we have an adequate supply of well-trained
scientists and engineers. Number two, we want to insure that we
have enough technically-trained workers for the many
technically-oriented positions that are going to be in the
workplace of the future, and thirdly, we want to make sure that
we have an insured electorate and an insured group of consumers
in this country.
If you ask the question, how can you best impact science
and math education in the K-12 system, the obvious answer is
through better-trained teachers. I have worked in this field
for over 30 years now, and I am pleased to say that the problem
is not that the teachers don't want to teach science or that
they are incapable of teaching science. It is that they really
do sincerely want to do a good job of teaching science and
mathematics. The difficulty is they have not been properly
trained in their college or university experiences, and so I
believe our first goal has to be to adequately train the
teachers who are already in the classrooms who have not
received sufficient training when they were in the higher
educational system.
A subsidiary to that which we will address later on in
other bills is how do we train teachers currently in the higher
educational system in a better way to teach math and science.
So the emphasis of H.R. 100 is twofold. First of all,making
certain that we do a good job of training existing teachers, and
secondly, to provide a master teacher system, what I call the go-to
teacher. In my personal experience in working with the schools the
single biggest factor in whether or not a teacher succeeded in the
classroom in teaching math and science when they had not had a large
amount of training in it, the single biggest factor was whether they
had a go-to person in the school that they could go to for help and
advice when the guppies died or the plants failed or the equipment
broke. And if they did not have that go-to person, generally the
science program did not succeed because the average teacher does not
have the expertise or the time to take care of problems like that.
It does take extra time and effort to teach science
properly, particularly with the hands-on approach. And the--at
the university level we have no extra time for faculty to teach
science through the laboratory system. We do not do that in the
K-8 system, and we need people around who are trained in the
field who can serve as a resource for the classroom teacher and
particularly who can take care of the equipment, make certain
that it is up to snuff and repair it when it is not.
The purpose of the H.R. 100 bill, the primary purpose is to
train a core of master teachers who will have the knowledge and
expertise to help other teachers in their particular school
building do an adequate job of teaching math and science but
who will also serve as a resource person in terms of the
equipment and materials needed.
I deeply appreciate the willingness of the Chair of the
Subcommittee and the Chair of the Full Committee. They have
been very, very helpful in reviewing this bill. As most of you
know this bill went to the floor last year. It passed this
Committee unanimously. It was defeated on suspensions last year
for another reason which we incidentally have corrected in this
bill but it still received a majority of the votes last year.
There is a lot of support for it. I appreciate the help I have
had from the Committee and the Subcommittee, both the Chairs
and the staff in revising the bill to take account of some of
the objections raised last year.
I believe it is in great shape, and I ask for your support.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Smith. We would thank the gentleman for--from
Michigan for his leadership in this area. I would like to note
for the record that this Subcommittee has held two hearings in
this area of improving math and science education, and it was
interesting that two of the witnesses suggested that the
initial interest and excitement andmotivation to move ahead and
take up math and science started in the kindergarten through the third
grade. And also that parents are so vital in lighting that initial fire
that tends to keep burning as far as pursuing the interest and the
knowledge in this area.
So it is my hope that we also can look at that kind of
example, that kind of success that has been exhibited in some
areas of kindling that initial fire of interest and then
continuing with the quality kind of education.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered as read
and open to amendment at any point, and without objection it is
so ordered.
I move the first reading of the bill be dispensed with if
that is in accord with the wishes of the Subcommittee. Without
objection it is so ordered.
We will move to the first amendment on the roster, which is
the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Chairman
Boehlert, and the clerk will report the amendment.
Madam Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 100 offered by Mr. Boehlert.
Chairman Smith. I would ask unanimous consent to dispense
with the reading. Without objection it is so ordered. Mr.
Boehlert is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to
offer this amendment in the nature of a substitute on behalf of
Dr. Ehlers who will explain ifs contents momentarily. Just let
me say once again this is a bipartisan amendment that insures
that all the goals of H.R. 100 will be met. And as we all know
very well the most important ingredient in a child's education
is not a fancy new physical plant, although we want our
youngsters to have good facilities, not the brightest and best-
illustrated textbooks, although they are very important. The
most important ingredient in a child's education is the
teacher. And we are focusing on the teacher, and let me
congratulate Dr. Ehlers for his leadership in this area. And
Mr. Chairman, let me congratulate you also, the dynamic duo
from Michigan I guess.
But it just bothers me as it should bother all Americans
that depending on whose figures you believe a
disproportionately high share of our youngsters K through 12
education are taking their science courses from people who are
not trained to teach science course. Dedicated educators, they
may have majored in French or history or something. They are in
the classroom teaching science because that is their
assignment.
We want to help them, and we want to get the best qualified
science disciplined major teachers in theclassroom, and we want
to get them the best instruction they have, and Dr. Ehlers' suggestion
on the development of master teacher core is just outstanding.
So with that I would hope that the Committee will move
forward, and I look forward to Dr. Ehlers' more comprehensive
explanation of the amendment.
Chairman Smith. The Chair would recognize for five minutes
the Ranking Member, the gentle lady from Texas, Representative
Johnson.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am
prepared to support the substitute amendment. It addresses the
main concern I had with the underlying bill by recasting the
master teacher provision in such a way as to provide for the
professional development and training of master teachers.
The provision as now constituted is consistent with the
approach taken by the master teacher language in H.R. 1693, the
Hall Science Education Bill. I would like to add that the
master teacher language in the bill follows the approach that
Congressman Etheridge recommended.
During the Committee's consideration of the Ehlers' Science
Education Bill last year the other provisions in the amendment
are consistent with what was approved in a bipartisan manner by
the Committee last year, and I recommend passage of this
substitute amendment. Thank you.
Chairman Smith. Chair would recognize the gentleman from
Michigan, Mr. Ehlers, for a brief explanation of the amendment.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I believe I was
can do it in less than five minutes because I have already
referred to parts of it. I appreciate the support evidenced,
and this shows that the legislator process does work because
the--everyone on this Committee has participated in some way in
revising the bill from last year and I think has improved it.
The H.R. 100 as introduced provided grants to schools to
hire master teachers, and that was a subject of some contention
last year when it reached the floor. This amendment changes
this program by providing grants to institutions of higher
education for the purpose of training master teachers but when
they do that, there will have to be a commitment from the
school that the teacher is employed by that they will use the
newly-trained talents of the master teachers to maximum
advantage so we are not just putting money into training. We
are insuring that the schools make a commitment to use that
training in a beneficial way.
This amendment also changes a provision in the bill we had
last year which provided for distance learning. It--rather than
providing grants directly to schools for distancelearning
activities as we had last year, the substitute amendment before us
would provide the grants to higher education institutions or
implementation of K-12 distance learning programs, primarily intended
so that the universities can develop distance learning experiments so
that students in elementary and secondary schools can actually be
involved in ongoing university experiments, doing it all through
distance learning through the internet.
This amendment also strikes Section 710 and 11, which
were--which we have determined to be duplicative of other
legislative proposals that are currently moving through the
House in the President's Education Bill.
So it is a streamlined bill compared to last year's but it
gets at the essence, and I think it improves the essence that
we had last year.
I appreciate the assistance everyone has given, and I urge
adoption of the amendment.
Chairman Smith. Any other discussions? If not, the vote
occurs on the amendment. All in favor will say aye. Aye. Those
opposed no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
Are there any further amendments? Hearing none the question
is on the passage of the bill H.R. 100 as amended. All those in
favor will say aye. Aye. Those opposed say no. In the opinion
of the Chair the ayes have it.
The Ranking Member for a motion.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that the
substitute--the Subcommittee favorably report the bill H.R. 100
is amended to the Full Committee with the recommendation that
it be an order for the amendment in the nature of a substitute
adopted by the Subcommittee, be considered as an original bill
for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule of the
Full Committee.
Further, I ask unanimous consent that the staff be
instructed to make all necessary technical and conforming
changes to the bill as amended in accordance with the
recommendations of the Subcommittee.
Chairman Smith. The Committee has heard the motion. Those
in favor will say aye. Aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have
it, and the motion is agreed to.
[H.R. 100 follows:]
Chairman Smith. Without objection the motion to reconsider
is laid on the table, and the Chair notes the presence of a
quorum. I would like to thank all of the members of the
Committee and good work, and with that I applaud everybody that
has been working on this. And the Subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:40 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP
H.R. 100, NATIONAL SCIENCE EDUCATION ACT
----------
JUNE 13, 2001
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
Chairman Boehlert. We will now consider H.R. 100, National
Science Education Act. And I think in view of the action on the
floor, we probably should suspend our deliberations for now. Go
to the floor, cast our ballots and come right back. And we
should be able to dispense of another very important bill in
short order.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Boehlert. Yes.
[Statement of Nick Smith follows:]
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC, June 7, 2001.
To: Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman.
From: Nick Smith, Chairman Subcommittee on Research.
Re: Subcommittee Mark-up of H.R. 1858.
On June 7, 2001, the Subcommittee on Research held a mark-up of
H.R. 1858, National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act. A
Manager's Amendment was offered by Mr. Smith and Ms. Johnson and was
adopted by a voice vote.
Attached for your information is a section by section analysis and
a copy of the measure.
____
H.R. 1858, as Reported by the Subcommittee on Research on June 7, 2001
sec. 1. short title
``National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act''.
sec. 2. findings
Discuss the goal set by the nation's Governors to establish the
U.S. as the world's leaders in math and science achievement by the year
2000, the failure to reach that goal, and the need to redouble efforts
to provide all of the country's students with a world-class education
in math, science, engineering, and technology.
sec. 3. definitions
Provides the standard references to define ``institution of higher
education'', ``local educational agency'', ``state educational
agency'', ``Director'', and defines ``eligible nonprofit
organization''.
sec. 4. authorizations of appropriations
Any authorization of appropriations in the bill is in addition to
amounts otherwise authorized or appropriated for the National Science
Foundation (NSF).
sec. 5. matching requirements
Allows the Director of NSF to establish matching fund requirements
for any of the programs authorized by the bill, with the exception of
the Noyce Scholarship program described in Title IV.
title i. mathematics and science education partnerships
Subtitle A. Mathematics and science education partnerships
Establishes a competitive, merit-based program to award grants to
institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations to
establish math and science partnership programs. Requires institutions
of higher education to partner with one or more local educational
agencies to be eligible to receive a partnership grant. Partnerships
may also include a state educational agency and/or one or more
businesses. Requires that the higher education institution include a
mathematics, science or engineering department in the programs carried
out through the partnership. At least 50% of the partnerships must
include businesses.
Lists allowable activities for partnership programs that include
teacher recruitment, training, and professional development--including
training in educational technologies--distance learning programs,
development of curricular materials and assessment tools, and others,
including any other activities the NSF Director determines will
accomplish the goals of the program. Specifies that the allowable
activities for partnerships shall include programs to encourage the
ongoing interest of girls in science, mathematics, engineering and
technology and prepare them to pursue college and graduate-level study
in these fields.Requires NSF Director to ensure, to the extent
practicable, that partnership grants be awarded in a geographically
diverse fashion, and that the partnerships include a diverse array of
rural, urban and suburban school districts.
Authorization of $200 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2006.
Subtitle B. Teacher research scholarship program
Establishes a competitive, merit-based grant program for
institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations to
provide research opportunities in mathematics, science, and engineering
for math and science teachers. Businesses or State laboratories may be
included as partners in the program. Grant recipients recruit and
select teachers, give them opportunities to conduct research, and
provide them with mentors and programming support. Grant recipients
must provide a stipend to participating teachers and may provide room
and board. Requires NSF Director to ensure, to the extent practicable,
that partnership grants be awarded in a geographically diverse fashion,
including rural, urban and suburban areas.
Authorization of $15 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2006.
title ii. national science, mathematics, engineering, and technology
education digital library
Directs the NSF Director to expand the National Science,
Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library
program by providing grants, on a competitive, peer-reviewed basis, to
institutions of higher education or other qualified entities to provide
timely and continuous dissemination of K-12 science, math, engineering,
and technology educational resources, materials, practices, and
policies through the Internet and other digital technologies. Allows
grant recipients to use funds to provide assistance to schools for the
selection and adaptation of curricular materials, practices, and
teaching methods that are made available through the Digital Library.
Allows the Director to contract out operation of the Digital Library.
Authorization of $20 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2006.
title iii. strategic education research program
Subtitle A. Centers
Directs the NSF Director to establish four multidisciplinary
Centers for Research on Learning and Education Improvement by awarding
grants, using a merit-based, competitive process, to institutions of
higher education. Centers are to conduct and evaluate research in
cognitive science, education and related fields and to develop ways in
which the results of such research can be applied to the teaching of K-
12 math and science. Each Center is to have a distinct research focus,
determined by the Director in consultation with the National Academy of
Sciences. Requires the Director to convene an annual meeting of the
Centers.
Authorization of $12 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through
2006.
Subtitle B. Fellowships
Establishes a fellowship program for K-12 teachers to pursue
education research fellowships at institutions of higher education.
Grants are to be awarded on a competitive, peer-reviewed basis to
institutions of higher education to set up programs that will enable K-
12 teachers to conduct research on cognitive science or education
research under the guidance of a researcher at the institution. Grant
recipients must recruit and select teachers, give them opportunities to
conduct research, and provide them with mentors and programming
support. Grant recipients must provide a stipend to participating
teachers and may provide room and board.
$5 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
title iv. robert noyce scholarship program
Establishes a competitive, merit-based grant program for
institutions of higher education to obtain grants in order to award
scholarships to recruit and train K-12 science and math teachers. Grant
recipients are to use the funds to establish programs that encourage
top college juniors and seniors majoring in science, math and
engineering, as well as science, math, and engineering professionals to
become K-12 science and math teachers by administering scholarships and
stipends, offering programs to help scholarship/stipend recipients
become certified to teach in K-12 schools, and offering programs to
help scholarship/stipend recipients to become better mathematics and
science teachers. Grant recipients will also offer programs to provide
professional and academic support to scholarship/stipend recipients
during their early years of teaching.
Scholarships for undergraduates are to be awarded for $7500 or the
cost of attendance, whichever is less. Stipends for science, math, and
engineering professionals are to be awarded for $7500 or the cost of
tuition, whichever is less. Individuals may receive a maximum of two
years' worth of support, and must agree to complete two years of
teaching in a K-12 school for every year of scholarship or stipend
funds awarded.
Scholarship recipients who do not complete even a single year of
their service obligation would be required to pay back the amount of
the award (plus interest) multiplied by two. Scholarship recipients who
complete at least one year of their service obligation but do not
complete the rest must repay only the total amount of their award, less
$3750 for each year of service completed, plus interest.
Requires NSF Director to ensure, to the extent practicable, that
partnership grants be awarded in a geographically diverse fashion, and
prepare recipients for jobs in rural, urban and suburban areas.
$20 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
title v. requirements for research centers
Requires the Director of NSF to ensure that grants that establish
new research centers at institutions of higher education incorporate an
elementary and secondary mathematics, science, engineering or
technology education component into their program.
title vi. miscellaneous provisions
Sec. 601. Mathematics and science proficiency partnerships
Establishes an NSF program to award grants of not more than
$300,000 (on a peer-reviewed, competitive basis) to local educational
agencies to develop math, science, and information technology
curricula, purchase equipment necessary to establish such programs, and
provide professional development opportunities for teachers. In order
to qualify for such a grant, the local educational agency must execute
an agreement with a private sector entity to provide services and funds
that include: donations of computers, establishment of internship and
mentoring programs, and the provision of college scholarships for
students committed to pursuing a career in math, science or information
technology. Special priority is to be given to grant applicants that
demonstrate the greatest economic need and the greatest ability to
attract funds and services from the private sector.
$5 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
Sec. 602. Articulation partnerships between community colleges and
secondary schools
For grant awards authorized under section 3(c)(2) of the Scientific
and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992, requires the Director to give
priority to grant proposals that involve secondary schools with a
majority of students from groups that are underrepresented in the
science, mathematics, and engineering workforce.
$5 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.
Sec. 603. Assessment of in-service professional development programs
Requires the Director to review all NSF programs that support
teacher training programs to determine (1) what level of resources and
degree of emphasis is placed on the training of teachers in the
effective use of information technologies and (2) the allocation of
resources between summer activities and follow-on training and support
to participating teachers during the school year. Requires that a
report be made to Congress on the results of the review.
title vii. educational technologies
Establishes an NSF program to award grants (on a peer-reviewed,
competitive basis) to institutions of higher education to establish
centers to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of information
technologies in K-12 math and science education. Centers would be
required to identify and study the effectiveness of educational
approaches and techniques that are based on the use of information
technology, to identify the key variables affecting educational
effectiveness, and then to ensure that the results of this analysis are
widely disseminated and effectively applied by K-12 schools. Allows the
Director to sponsor conferences, workshops, and websites in order to
disseminate information further.
$25 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004;
$30 million authorized for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
Mr. Smith. Would it be possible, with the consent of the
sponsor of the bill that maybe we could do this in the next 5
minutes, before we go to the floor?
Chairman Boehlert. Dr. Ehlers?
Mr. Ehlers. Mr. Chairman, I am quite sure we can.
Chairman Boehlert. All right. I ask unanimous consent that
the bill be considered as read and open to amendment at any
point. I ask the members to proceed with the amendments in the
order of the roster. I move that the first reading of the bill
be dispensed with. I--let's see. Chair recognizes Mr. Ehlers.
[Statements of Vernon J. Ehlers and Sheila Jackson Lee
follow:]
Opening Statement of Hon. Vernon J. Ehlers
Today we are marking up H.R. 100, the National Science Education
Act, the first of three bills aimed at improving science, math,
engineering, and technology education--known as ``SMET ed.'' H.R. 100
is similar to H.R. 4271, which passed this Committee by a unanimous
vote during the 106th Congress. I want to thank Chairman Boehlert for
his leadership on this issue.
Our K-12 education system serves three main purposes: it is
responsible for preparing future scientists and engineers for further
study in college and graduate school; it provides all future workers
the basic technical skills they will need in a 21st century workforce,
where nearly every job will have a technical component; and it provides
scientific and technical understanding so that citizens may make
informed decisions as consumers and voters. Unfortunately, recent
international assessments of student performance in science and math
showed that our twelfth grade students were well behind their
international peers.
As most of you know, during the 106th Congress, this Committee
conducted a series of hearings to further examine the state of the
nation's math and science education, and to suggest improvements. While
there are many factors that impact student achievement, a common theme
that arose from our discussions is that there is no substitute for a
knowledgeable and well-prepared teacher in the classroom.
Teachers, particularly at the elementary and middle school level,
often lack time and school resources to implement an inquiry-based,
hands-on science curriculum. Unlike H.R. 4271 of last year, which
authorized grants to elementary and middle schools to hire master
teachers, H.R. 100 authorizes a competitive grant program for higher
education institutions to train teachers to become master teachers.
Teachers with strong backgrounds in math, science, engineering and
technology would be trained as master teachers to provide on-going
professional development, in-classroom assistance, and oversight of
hands-on science materials to a group of elementary and middle school
SMET teachers. This is the type of support our teachers deserve and
should be receiving.
In addition, this bill requires NSF and the National Academies to
evaluate existing studies on the effectiveness of technology in the
classroom on learning and student performance. Federal, state, and
local governments have done a good job providing funds for technology
acquisition, but it is unclear what technologies and software work best
and how technology enhances student learning.
This bill also creates a program for higher education institutions
to provide distance learning opportunities for elementary and secondary
students. Distance learning invites exciting possibilities for student
learning, particularly for student scientific research.
I look forward to having my colleagues' input and support today and
to consideration by the full House in the future. With this effort, our
nation's teachers and students will be one step closer to receiving the
support and education they so much deserve.
I would like to close by thanking Chairman Boehlert and
subcommittee Chairman Smith for working with me to bring this bill
forward today.
__________
Statement of Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and Ranking Member Ralph
Hall for this opportunity to markup, H.R. 1858, which would make
improvements in mathematics and science education in our nation, and
H.R. 100, the National Science and Education Act. These bills are long
over due and are much needed in ensuring that we have adequate numbers
of trained scientists and mathematicians for the technological and
economic challenges of tomorrow.
H.R. 1858 offers support to current teachers and help to recruit
and retain new teachers who are trained and accredited to teach math
and science.
In order to accomplish the goals of this legislation it would
create new approaches for the Nations Science Foundation (NSF) to take
in building a stronger and more diverse repository of mathematics and
science trained teachers. The long range goal is to provide instruction
in math and science by teachers who are trained in those areas, and
through this effort increase the number of students who pursue math and
science undergraduate and graduate degrees.
It is my goal along with the committee's to create a public
education system that would develop a technologically capable workforce
that can compete in the global economy.
Toward this end, I have offered several amendments to H.R. 1858.
The first amendment directs that the National Digital Library contain
information about electronic links to materials that educators may
access. The second amendment requires that research center awards focus
on research and development of educational practices designed to
improve the academic performance of a broad range of students,
including those from underrepresented groups.
Through the committee hearing process on these particular bills the
groups that are underrepresented have been identified as African
Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans and women.
The last amendment directs that the NSF provide information on the
awarding of Robert Noyce Scholarships. As a result of this amendment
the NSF will be required to collect relevant statistically and
demographic data on scholarship recipients and information on the
locations at which scholarship recipients carry out their teaching
requirement. This report is required by year 7 of the program assessing
its impact on drawing math and science students into teaching careers,
including students from underrepresented groups.
I thank the Chair and committee members for their consideration of
these amendments and look forward to their inclusion in the final bill
sent to the House by this committee.
Thank you.
Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an opening
statement. In the interest of time, I will just give that to
the reporter to enter into the record.
Let me just say this bill has had thorough examination and
passed this Committee last year, unanimously. It has been
improved since that time. I think it deserves the same action
today, that is, unanimous passage. And in the interest of time,
I will just withhold further comment at this time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. Is there any other
discussion? No amendments? Then--I move that the Committee
report that bill H.R. 100, as amend--no amendments. Further, I
move to instruct the staff to prepare the legislative report to
make technical and confirming amendments and that the Chairman
take all necessary steps to bring the bill before the House for
consideration. The vote is on the bill, H.R. 100. All in favor
say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. The chair notes the
presence of a reported quorum. The question is then--well, we
already did that. I move that the members have 2 subsequent
calendar days in which to submit supplemental, minority or
additional views on the measure. Mr. Gordon?
Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I move the Committee favorably
report H.R. 100 as amended to the House, with the
recommendation that the bill, as amended, do pass. Furthermore,
I move that the staff be instructed to prepare the legislative
report and make necessary technical and performing changes.
That the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill
before the House for consideration.
Chairman Boehlert. We do have a reporting quorum. All in
favor say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. And I move that
the Members have 2 subsequent calendar days, et cetera. This
Committee is now adjourned. Good work.
[Whereupon, at 10:40 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]