Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics Programs and Related Trends (12-OCT-05, GAO-06-114).
The United States has long been known as a world leader in
scientific and technological innovation. To help maintain this
advantage, the federal government has spent billions of dollars
on education programs in the science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) fields for many years. However, concerns
have been raised about the nation's ability to maintain its
global technological competitive advantage in the future. This
report presents information on (1) the number of federal programs
funded in fiscal year 2004 that were designed to increase the
number of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and
occupations or improve educational programs in STEM fields, and
what agencies report about their effectiveness; (2) how the
numbers, percentages, and characteristics of students, graduates,
and employees in STEM fields have changed over the years; and (3)
factors cited by educators and others as affecting students'
decisions about pursing STEM degrees and occupations, and
suggestions that have been made to encourage more participation.
GAO received written and/or technical comments from several
agencies. While one agency, the National Science Foundation,
raised several questions about the findings, the others generally
agreed with the findings and conclusion and several agencies
commended GAO for this work.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-06-114
ACCNO: A39437
TITLE: Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related Trends
DATE: 10/12/2005
SUBJECT: College students
Education program evaluation
Engineering
Higher education
Life sciences
Mathematics
Physical sciences
Statistical data
Technology
Strategic planning
Education programs
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-114
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Report to the Chairman, Committee on Rules, House of Representatives
October 2005
HIGHER EDUCATION
Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related
Trends
GAO-06-114
[IMG]
October 2005
HIGHER EDUCATION
Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related
Trends
What GAO Found
Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies reported spending about $2.8
billion in fiscal year 2004 for 207 education programs designed to
increase the numbers of students and graduates or improve educational
programs in STEM fields, but agencies reported little about their
effectiveness. The National Institutes of Health and the National Science
Foundation had most of the programs and spent most of the funds. Officials
also reported that evaluations were completed or under way for about half
of the programs.
Federal STEM Education Programs and Funding by Agency, Fiscal Year 2004
Dollars in millions National Institutes of Health (NIH)
800 Environmental Protection 600 Agency (EPA) 400 Health Resources and
Services 200 Administration (HRSA)
0
NIH
(51)
NSF
(48)
NASA
(5) (4)
Education
AEP
(21)
HRSA
(3)
s
(75)
All other
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
While the total numbers of students, graduates, and employees in STEM
fields increased, changes in the numbers and percentages of women,
minorities, and international students varied during the periods reviewed.
From academic year 1995-1996 to 2003-2004, the percentage of students in
STEM fields increased from 21 to 23 percent. Changes in the percentages of
domestic minority students varied by group. From academic year 1994-1995
to 2002-2003, the number of graduates in STEM fields increased 8 percent,
but this was less than the 30 percent increase in graduates in non-STEM
fields. International graduates continued to earn about one-third or more
of the advanced degrees in three STEM fields. Between calendar years 1994
and 2003, employment in STEM fields increased 23 percent compared to 17
percent in non-STEM fields, and there was no statistically significant
change in the percentage of women employees.
Educators and others cited several factors that affected students'
decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and made
suggestions to encourage more participation. They said teacher quality at
the kindergarten to 12th grades, the mathematics and science courses
completed in high school, and a mentor, especially for women and
minorities, influenced domestic students' decisions. Also, these sources
said that opportunities outside the United States and the visa process
affected international students' decisions. To encourage more
participation in STEM fields, educators and others made several
suggestions. But before adopting any of them, it is important to know the
extent to which existing STEM education programs are appropriately
targeted and making the best use of available federal resources.
United States Government Accountability Office
Contents
Letter
Results in Brief
Background
More than 200 Federal Education Programs Are Designed to
Increase the Numbers of Students and Graduates or Improve Educational
Programs in STEM Fields, but Most Have Not Been Evaluated
Numbers of Students, Graduates, and Employees in STEM Fields Generally
Increased, but Percentage Changes Varied
University Officials and Others Cited Several Factors That Influence
Decisions about Participation in STEM Fields and Suggested Ways to
Encourage Greater Participation
Concluding Observations
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
1
3 5
10
18
32 41 42
Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Appendix II List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Appendix III Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or More
Appendix IV Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Appendix V Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at
the Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels 79
Appendix VI Confidence Intervals for Estimates of STEM
Employment by Gender, Race or Ethnicity, and
Wages and Salaries 88
Appendix VII Comments from the Department of Commerce 91
Appendix VIII Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services
Appendix IX Comments from the National Science Foundation
Appendix X Comments from the National Science and Technology Council
Appendix XI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
Bibliography
Tables
Table 1: Sources of Data, Data Obtained, Time Span of Data, and Years
Analyzed 2 Table 2: List of STEM Fields Based on NCES's NPSAS and IPEDS
Data and BLS's CPS Data 6
Table 3: Percentage of the U.S. Population for Selected Racial or Ethnic
Groups in the Civilian Labor Force, Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 8
Table 4: Number of STEM Education Programs Reported by Federal Civilian
Agencies 11 Table 5: Funding Levels for Federal STEM Education Programs in
Fiscal Year 2004 13 Table 6: Program Goals and Numbers of STEM Programs
with One or Multiple Goals 14 Table 7: Numbers of STEM Programs with One
or Multiple Types of Assistance and Beneficiaries 14
Table 8: Numbers of STEM Programs Targeted to One Group and Multiple
Groups 15
Table 9: Estimated Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of Students in
the STEM and Non-STEM Fields across All Education Levels, Academic Years
1995-1996 and 20032004 20
Table 10: Estimated Percentage Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of
Domestic Minority Students in STEM fields for All Education Levels for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 21
Table 11: Estimated Changes in Numbers of International Students in STEM
fields by Education Levels from the 1995-1996 Academic Year to the
2003-2004 Academic Year 22
Table 12: Numbers of Graduates and Percentage Changes in STEM and Non-STEM
Fields across All Degree Levels from the 1994-1995 Academic Year to the
2002-2003 Academic Year 23
Table 13: Numbers and Percentage Changes in Men and Women Graduates with
STEM Degrees by Education Level and Field for Academic Years 1994-1995 and
2002-2003 25
Table 14: Numbers and Percentage Changes in Domestic Minority Graduates in
STEM Fields by Education Levels and Race or Ethnicity for Academic Years
1994-1995 and 2002-2003 26
Table 15: Changes in Numbers and Percentages of International Graduates in
STEM fields at the Master's and Doctoral Degree Levels, 1994-1995 and
2002-2003 Academic Years 27
Table 16: Estimated Numbers and Percentages of Employees in STEM Fields by
Gender in Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 (numbers in thousands) 29
Table 17: Estimated Percentages of STEM Employees by Selected Racial or
Ethnic Group for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 30 Table 18: Sources of
Data, Data Obtained, Time Span of Data, and
Years Analyzed 48 Table 19: Classification codes and Occupations,
2002-2003 51 Table 20: Classification codes and occupations, 1994-2001 52
Table 21: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded in FY 2004 57 Table 22:
Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million
or More during Fiscal Year 2004 or Fiscal Year 2005 64
Table 23: Estimated Numbers of Students in STEM Fields by Education Level
for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 20032004 74
Table 24: Estimated Percentages of Students by Gender and STEM Field for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 75
Table 25: Estimated Number of Women Students and Percentage Change by
Education Level and STEM Field for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
77
Table 26: Comparisons in the Percentage of STEM Graduates by Field and
Gender for Academic Years 1994-1995 and 20022003 78
Table 27: Estimated Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of Students in
the STEM and Non-STEM Fields across All Education Levels, Academic Years
1995-1996 and 20032004 (95 percent confidence intervals) 79
Table 28: Numbers of Students by Education Level in all STEM Fields for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence intervals)
80
Table 29: Estimated Numbers and Percentage Changes in Women Students in
STEM Fields, Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence
intervals) 81
Table 30: Estimated Percentage Changes in Bachelor's, Master's, and
Doctoral Students in STEM Fields, Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
(95 percent confidence intervals) 83
Table 31: Estimates of STEM Students by Gender and Field for Academic
Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence intervals) 84
Table 32: Estimates of Students for Selected Racial or Ethnic Groups in
STEM Fields for All Education Levels and Fields for the Academic Years
1995-1996 and 2002-2003 (95 percent fonfidence intervals) 86
Table 33: Estimates of International Students in STEM Fields by Education
Levels for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 20032004 (95 percent confidence
intervals) 87
Table 34: Estimated Total Number of Employees by STEM Field between
Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 88 Table 35: Estimated Numbers of Employees
in STEM Fields by Gender for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 89 Table 36:
Estimated Changes in STEM Employment by Gender for Calendar Years 1994 and
2003 89 Table 37: Estimated Percentages of STEM Employees for Selected
Racial or Ethnic Groups for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 90 Table 38:
Estimated Changes in Median Annual Wages and Salaries in the STEM Fields
for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 90
Figures
Figure 1: Amounts Funded by Agencies for STEM-Related Federal
Education Programs in Fiscal Year 2004 12
Figure 2: Key Changes in Students, Graduates, and Employees in
STEM Fields 19
Figure 3: Percentage Changes in Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral
Graduates in STEM Fields from Academic Year 1994-1995
to Academic Year 2002-2003 24
Figure 4: Estimated Numbers of Employees in STEM Fields from
Calendar Years 1994 through 2003 28
Figure 5: Estimated Median Annual Wages and Salaries in STEM
Fields for Calendar Years 1994 through 2003 32
Abbreviations
BEST Building Engineering and Science Talent
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CGS Council of Graduate Schools
CLF civilian labor force
COS Committee on Science
CPS Current Population Survey
DHS Department of Homeland Security
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
HHS Health and Human Services
HRSA Health Resources and Services Administration
IPEDS Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NCES National Center for Education Statistics
NCLBA No Child Left Behind Act
NIH National Institutes of Health
NPSAS National Postsecondary Student Aid Study
NSF National Science Foundation
NSTC National Science and Technology Council
SAO Security Advisory Opinion
SEVIS Student and Exchange Visitor Information System
STEM science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
United States Government Accountability Office Washington, DC 20548
October 12, 2005
The Honorable David Dreier Chairman, Committee on Rules House of
Representatives
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The United States has long been known as a world leader in scientific and
technological innovation. To help maintain this advantage, the federal
government has spent billions of dollars on education programs in the
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields for many
years. Some of these programs were designed to increase the numbers of
women and minorities pursuing degrees in STEM fields. In addition, for
many years, thousands of international students came to the United States
to study and work in STEM fields. However, concerns have been raised about
the nation's ability to maintain its global technological competitive
advantage in the future. In spite of the billions of dollars spent to
encourage students and graduates to pursue studies in STEM fields or
improve STEM educational programs, the percentage of United States
students earning bachelor's degrees in STEM fields has been relatively
constant-about a third of bachelor's degrees-since 1977. Furthermore,
after the events of September 11, 2001, the United States established
several new systems and processes to help enhance border security. In some
cases, implementation of these new systems and processes, which
established requirements for several federal agencies, higher education
institutions, and potential students, made it more difficult for
international students to enter this country to study and work.
In the last few years, many reports and news articles have been published,
and several bills have been introduced in Congress that address issues
related to STEM education and occupations. This report presents
information on (1) the number of federal civilian education programs
funded in fiscal year 2004 that were designed to increase the numbers of
students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or improve
educational programs in STEM fields and what agencies report about their
effectiveness; (2) how the numbers, percentages, and characteristics of
students, graduates, and employees in STEM fields have changed over the
years; and (3) factors cited by educators and others as influencing
people's decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and
suggestions that have been made to encourage greater
participation in STEM fields. To determine the number of programs designed
to increase the numbers of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees
and occupations, we identified 15 federal departments and agencies as
having STEM programs, and we developed and conducted a survey asking each
department or agency to provide information on its education programs,
including information about their effectiveness.1 We received responses
from 14 of them, the Department of Defense did not participate, and we
determined that at least 13 agencies had STEM education programs during
fiscal year 2004 that met our criteria.
To describe how the numbers of students, graduates, and employees in STEM
fields have changed, we analyzed and reported data from the Department of
Education's (Education) National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
and the Department of Labor's (Labor) Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Specifically, as shown in table 1, we used the National Postsecondary
Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System (IPEDS) from NCES and the Current Population Survey (CPS) data from
BLS. We assessed the data for reliability and reasonableness and found
them to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.
Table 1: Sources of Data, Data Obtained, Time Span of Data, and Years Analyzed
Time
span
Department Agency Database Data obtained of data Years analyzed
Education NCES NPSAS College student Academic years
enrollment 9 years 1995-1996 and
2003-2004
Education NCES IPEDS Academic years
Graduation/degrees 9 years 1994-1995 and
2002-2003
Labor BLS CPS Calendar years
Employment 10 years 1994 through 2003
Sources: NCES's National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and BLS's Current
Population Survey (CPS) data.
Note: Enrollment and employment information are based on sample data and
are subject to sampling error. The 95-percent confidence intervals for
student enrollment estimates are contained in appendix V of this report.
Percentage estimates for STEM employment have 95-percent confidence
intervals of within +/- 6 percentage points and other employment estimates
(such as wages and salaries) have confidence intervals of within +/- 10
percent of the estimate, unless otherwise noted. See appendixes I, V, and
VI for additional information.
1For the purposes of this report, we will use the term "agency" when
referring to any of the 13 federal departments and agencies that responded
to our survey.
To obtain perspectives on the factors that influence people's decisions
about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and to obtain suggestions for
encouraging greater participation in STEM fields, we interviewed educators
and administrators in eight colleges and universities (the University of
California Los Angeles and the University of Southern California in
California; Clark Atlanta University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and
Spelman College in Georgia; the University of Illinois; Purdue University
in Indiana; and Pennsylvania State University). We selected these colleges
and universities to include a mix of public and private institutions,
provide geographic diversity, and include a few minority-serving
institutions, including one (Spelman College) that serves only women
students. In addition, most of the institutions had large total numbers of
students, including international students, enrolled in STEM fields. We
also asked officials from the eight universities to identify current
students to whom we could send an e-mail survey. We received responses
from 31 students from five of these institutions. In addition, we
interviewed federal agency officials and representatives from associations
and education organizations, and analyzed reports on various topics
related to STEM education and occupations. Appendix I contains a more
detailed discussion of our scope and methodology. We conducted our work
between October 2004 and October 2005 in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards.
Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies reported having 207 education
programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were designed to increase the
numbers of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or
improve educational programs in STEM fields, but they reported little
about the effectiveness of these programs. The 13 agencies reported
spending about $2.8 billion in fiscal year 2004 for these programs.
According to the survey responses, the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
and the National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored 99 of the 207 programs
and spent about $2 billion of the approximate $2.8 billion. The program
costs ranged from $4,000 for a national scholars program sponsored by the
Department of Agriculture (USDA) to about $547 million for an NIH program
that is designed to develop and enhance research training opportunities
for individuals in biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research by
supporting training programs at institutions of higher learning. Officials
reported that most of the 207 programs had multiple goals, and many were
targeted to multiple groups. For example, 2 programs were identified as
having one goal of attracting and preparing students at any education
level to pursue coursework in STEM areas, while 112 programs had this as
one of multiple goals. Agency officials also
Results in Brief
reported that evaluations were completed or under way for about half of
the programs, and most of the completed evaluations reported that the
programs had been effective and achieved established goals. However, some
programs that have not been evaluated have operated for many years.
While the total numbers of students, graduates, and employees have
increased in STEM fields, changes in the numbers and percentages of women,
minorities and international students varied during the periods reviewed.
From the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, the
number of students increased in STEM fields by 21 percent- more than the
11 percent increase in non-STEM fields. Also, students enrolled in STEM
fields increased from 21 percent to 23 percent of all students. Changes in
the numbers and percentages of domestic minority students varied by group.
For example, the number of African American students increased 69 percent
and the number of Hispanic students increased 33 percent. The total number
of graduates in STEM fields increased by 8 percent from the 1994-1995
academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year, while graduates in non-STEM
fields increased 30 percent. Further, the numbers of graduates decreased
in at least four of eight STEM fields at each education level. The total
number of domestic minority graduates in STEM fields increased, and
international graduates continued to earn about one-third or more of the
master's and doctoral degrees in three fields. Moreover, from 1994 to
2003, employment increased by 23 percent in STEM fields as compared with
17 percent in non-STEM fields. African American employees continued to be
less than 10 percent of all STEM employees, and there was no statistically
significant change in the percentage of women employees.
Educators and others cited several factors as influencing students'
decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and they suggested
many ways to encourage more participation in STEM fields. Studies,
education experts, university officials, and others cited teacher quality
at the kindergarten through 12th grade levels and students' high school
preparation in mathematics and science courses as major factors that
influence domestic students' decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and
occupations. In addition, university officials, students, and studies
identified mentoring as a key factor for women and minorities. Also,
according to university officials, education experts, and reports,
international students' decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and
occupations in the United States are influenced by yet other factors,
including more stringent visa requirements and increased educational
opportunities outside the United States. We have reported that several
aspects of the visa process have been improved, but further steps could be
taken. In order to promote participation in the STEM fields, officials at
most of the eight universities visited and current students offered
suggestions that focused on four areas: teacher quality, mathematics and
science preparation and courses, outreach to underrepresented groups, and
the federal role in STEM education. The students who responded to our
e-mail survey generally agreed with most of the suggestions and expressed
their desires for better mathematics and science preparation for college.
However, before adopting such suggestions, it is important to know the
extent to which existing STEM education programs are appropriately
targeted and making the best use of available federal resources.
We received written comments on a draft of this report from the Department
of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National
Science and Technology Council. These agencies generally agreed with our
findings and conclusions. We also received written comments from the
National Science Foundation which questioned our findings related to
program evaluations, interagency collaboration, and the methodology we
used to support our findings on the factors that influenced decisions
about pursing STEM fields. Also, the National Science Foundation provided
information to clarify examples cited in the report, stated that the data
categories were not clear, and commented on the graduate level enrollment
data we used. We revised the report to acknowledge that the National
Science Foundation uses a variety of mechanisms to evaluate its programs
and we added a bibliography that identifies the reports and research used
during the course of this review to address the comment about our
methodology related to the factors that influenced decisions about
pursuing STEM fields. We also revised the report to clarify the examples
and the data categories and to explain the reasons for selecting the
enrollment data we used. However, we did not make changes to address the
comment related to interagency collaboration for the reason explained in
the agency comments section of this report. The written comments are
reprinted in appendixes VII, VIII, IX, and X. In addition, we received
technical comments from the Departments of Commerce, Health and Human
Services, Homeland Security, Labor, and Transportation, and the
Environmental Protection Agency and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, which we incorporated when appropriate.
Background STEM includes many fields of study and occupations. Based on
the National Science Foundations' categorization of STEM fields, we
developed STEM fields of study from NCES's National Postsecondary Student
Aid Study (NPSAS) and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS), and identified occupations from BLS's Current Population Survey
(CPS). Using these data sources, we developed nine STEM fields for
students, eight STEM fields for graduates, and four broad STEM fields for
occupations. Table 2 lists these STEM fields and occupations and examples
of subfields. Additional information on STEM occupations is provided in
appendix I.
Table 2: List of STEM Fields Based on NCES's NPSAS and IPEDS Data and
BLS's CPS Data
Enrollment-NCES' NPSAS
data Degrees-NCES' IPEDS data Occupations-BLS' CPS data
Agricultural sciences Biological/agricultural sciences
o Botany
o Zoology
o Dairy
Biological sciences o Forestry
o Poultry
o Wildlife management
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences
o Geology
o Geophysics and seismology
Science
o Agricultural and food scientists
o Astronomers and physicists
o Atmospheric and space scientists
o Biological scientists
o Chemists and materials scientists
o Environmental scientists and geoscientists
o Nurses
o Psychologists
o Sociologists
o Urban and regional planners
Physical sciences Physical sciences
o Chemistry
o Physics
Psychology Psychology
o Clinical
o Social
Social sciences Social sciences
o Political science
o Sociology
Technology Technology Technology
o Solar o Clinical laboratory technologists and
technicians
o Automotive o Diagnostic-related technologists and
engineering technicians
o Medical, dental, and ophthalmic laboratory
technicians
Enrollment-NCES' NPSAS
data Degrees-NCES' IPEDS data Occupations-BLS' CPS data
Engineering Engineering
o Aerospace, aeronautical, and astronautical
o Architectural
o Chemical
o Civil
o Electrical, electronics, and communication
o Nuclear
Engineering
o Architects, except naval
o Aerospace engineers
o Chemical engineers
o Civil engineers
o Electrical and electronic engineers
o Nuclear engineers
Computer sciences Mathematics/computer sciences Mathematics and computer
sciences
Mathematics o Actuarial science o Computer scientists and
systems analysts
o Applied mathematics o Computer programmers
o Mathematical statistics o Computer software
engineers
o Operations research o Actuaries
o Data processing o Mathematicians
o Programming o Statisticians
Sources: NCES for NPSAS and IPEDS data; CPS for occupations.
Note: This table is not designed to show a direct relationship from
enrollment to occupation, but to provide examples of majors, degrees, and
occupations in STEM fields from the three sources of data.
Many of the STEM fields require completion of advanced courses in
mathematics or science, subjects that are introduced and developed at the
kindergarten through 12th grade level, and the federal government has
taken steps to help improve achievement in these and other subjects.
Enacted in 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) seeks to improve the
academic achievement of all of the nation's school-aged children. NCLBA
requires that states develop and implement academic content and
achievement standards in mathematics, science and the reading or language
arts. All students are required to participate in statewide assessments
during their elementary and secondary school years. Improving teacher
quality is another goal of NCLBA as a strategy to raise student academic
achievement. Specifically, all teachers teaching core academic subjects
must be highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.2 NCLBA
generally defines highly qualified teachers as those that have (1) a
bachelor's degree, (2) state certification, and (3) subject area knowledge
for each academic subject they teach.
2Core subjects include English, reading or language arts, mathematics,
science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts,
history, and geography.
The federal government also plays a role in coordinating federal science
and technology issues. The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC)
was established in 1993 and is the principal means for the Administration
to coordinate science and technology among the diverse parts of the
federal research and development areas. One objective of NSTC is to
establish clear national goals for federal science and technology
investments in areas ranging from information technologies and health
research to improving transportation systems and strengthening fundamental
research. NSTC is responsible for preparing research and development
strategies that are coordinated across federal agencies in order to
accomplish these multiple national goals.
In addition, the federal government, universities and colleges, and others
have developed programs to provide opportunities for all students to
pursue STEM education and occupations.3 Additional steps have been taken
to increase the numbers of women, minorities, and students with
disadvantaged backgrounds in the STEM fields, such as providing additional
academic and research opportunities. According to the 2000 Census, 52
percent of the total U.S. population 18 and over were women; in 2003,
members of racial or ethnic groups constituted from 0.5 percent to 12.6
percent of the civilian labor force (CLF), as shown in table 3.
Table 3: Percentage of the U.S. Population for Selected Racial or Ethnic
Groups in the Civilian Labor Force, Calendar Years 1994 and 2003
Percentage of Percentage of
U.S. population U.S. population
Race or ethnicity in the CLF, 1994 in the CLF, 2003
Hispanic or Latino origin 8.9 12.6
Black or African American 10.8 10.7
Asian 2.8 4.4
American Indian or Alaska Native 0.5 0.5
Source: GAO calculations based upon March 1994 and March 2003 CPS data.
In addition to domestic students, international students have pursued STEM
degrees and worked in STEM occupations in the United States. To
3Other federal programs that are not specifically designed to attract
students to STEM education and occupations, such as Pell Grants, may
provide financial assistance to students who obtain degrees in STEM
fields.
do so, international students and scholars must obtain visas.4
International students who wish to study in the United States must first
apply to a Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS)
certified school. In order to enroll students from other nations, U.S.
colleges and universities must be certified by the Student and Exchange
Visitor Program within the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration
and Customs Enforcement organization. As of February 2004, nearly 9,000
technical schools and colleges and universities had been certified. SEVIS,
is an Internet-based system that maintains data on international students
and exchange visitors before and during their stay in the United States.
Upon admitting a student, the school enters the student's name and other
information into the SEVIS database. At this time the student may apply
for a student visa. In some cases, a Security Advisory Opinion (SAO) from
the Department of State (State) may be needed to determine whether or not
to issue a visa to the student. SAOs are required for a number of reasons,
including concerns that a visa applicant may engage in the illegal
transfer of sensitive technology. An SAO based on technology transfer
concerns is known as Visas Mantis and, according to State officials, is
the most common type of SAO applied to science applicants.5 In April 2004,
the Congressional Research Service reported that State maintains a
technology alert list that includes 16 sensitive areas of study. The list
was produced in an effort to help the United States prevent the illegal
transfer of controlled technology and includes chemical and biotechnology
engineering, missile technology, nuclear technology, robotics, and
advanced computer technology.6
Many foreign workers enter the United States annually through the H-1B
visa program, which assists U.S. employers in temporarily filling
specialty
4There are several types of visas that authorize people to study and work
in the United States. F, or student, visas, are for study at 2- and 4-year
colleges and universities and other academic institutions; the exchange
visitor, or J, visas are for people who will be participating in a
cultural exchange program; and M visas are for nonacademic study at
institutions, such as vocational and technical schools. In addition, H-1B
visas allow noncitizens to work in the United States.
5GAO, Border Security: Streamlined Visas Mantis Program Has Lowered Burden
on Foreign Science Students and Scholars, but Further Refinements Needed,
GAO-05-198 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 18, 2005).
6Congressional Research Service, Science, Engineering, and Mathematics
Education: Status and Issues, 98-871 STM, April 27, 2004, Washington, D.C.
More than 200 Federal Education Programs Are Designed to Increase the Numbers
of Students and Graduates or Improve Educational Programs in STEM Fields, but
Most Have Not Been Evaluated
occupations.7 Employed workers may stay in the United States on an H-1B
visa for up to 6 years. The current cap on the number of H-1B visas that
can be granted is 65,000. The law exempts certain workers, however, from
this cap, including those who are employed or have accepted employment in
specified positions. Moreover, up to 20,000 exemptions are allowed for
those holding a master's degree or higher.
Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies reported having 207 education
programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were specifically established to
increase the numbers of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and
occupations, or improve educational programs in STEM fields, but they
reported little about the effectiveness of these programs.8 These 13
federal agencies reported spending about $2.8 billion for their STEM
education programs. Taken together, NIH and NSF sponsored nearly half of
the programs and spent about 71 percent of the funds. In addition,
agencies reported that most of the programs had multiple goals, and many
were targeted to multiple groups. Although evaluations have been done or
were under way for about half of the programs, little is known about the
extent to which most STEM programs are achieving their desired results.
Coordination among the federal STEM education programs has been limited.
However, in 2003, the National Science and Technology Council formed a
subcommittee to address STEM education and workforce policy issues across
federal agencies.
7A specialty occupation is defined as one that requires the application of
a body of highly specialized knowledge, and the attainment of at least a
bachelor's degree (or its equivalent), and the possession of a license or
other credential to practice the occupation if required.
8 GAO asked agencies to include STEM and related education programs with
one or more of the following as a primary objective: (1) attract and
prepare students at any education level to pursue coursework in STEM
areas, (2) attract students to pursue degrees (2-year degrees through post
doctoral) in STEM fields, (3) provide growth and research opportunities
for college and graduate students in STEM fields, such as working with
researchers and/or conducting research to further their education, (4)
attract graduates to pursue careers in STEM fields, (5) improve teacher
(pre-service, in-service, and postsecondary) education in STEM areas, and
(6) improve or expand the capacity of institutions to promote or foster
STEM fields.
Federal Civilian Agencies Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies
provided information on 207 Reported Sponsoring over STEM education
programs funded in fiscal year 2004. The numbers of 200 STEM Education
programs ranged from 51 to 1 per agency with two agencies, NIH and NSF,
sponsoring nearly half of the programs-99 of 207. Table 4 provides
aPrograms and Spending summary of the numbers of programs by agency, and
appendix II containsBillions in Fiscal Year 2004 a list of the 207 STEM
education programs and funding levels for fiscal
year 2004 by agency.
Table 4: Number of STEM Education Programs Reported by Federal Civilian
Agencies
Number of STEM Federal agency education programs
Department of Health and Human Services/ National Institutes of Health
National Science Foundation
Department of Energy
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of the Interior
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Department of Education
Department of Transportation
Department of Health and Human Services/Health Resources and Services
Administration
Department of Health and Human Services/Indian Health Service
Department of Homeland Security
Total
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
Federal civilian agencies reported that approximately $2.8 billion was
spent on STEM education programs in fiscal year 2004.9 The funding levels
for STEM education programs among the agencies ranged from about $998
million to about $4.7 million. NIH and NSF accounted for about 71 percent
of the total-about $2 billion of the approximate $2.8 billion. NIH spent
9The program funding levels, as provided by agency officials, contain both
actual and estimated amounts for fiscal year 2004.
about $998 million in fiscal year 2004, about 3.6 percent of its $28
billion appropriation, and NSF spent about $997 million, which represented
18 percent of its appropriation. Four other agencies, some with a few
programs, spent about 23 percent of the total: $636 million. For example,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) spent about $231
million on 5 programs and the Department of Education (Education) spent
about $221 million on 4 programs during fiscal year 2004. Figure 1 shows
the 6 federal civilian agencies that used the most funds for STEM
education programs and the funds used by the remaining 7 agencies.
Figure 1: Amounts Funded by Agencies for STEM-Related Federal Education
Programs in Fiscal Year 2004
Dollars in millions
1,200
998 997
1,000
800
600
400
200 0 National Institutes
e National Sciencof Health Foundation
National Aeronautics and
Space AdministrationEducation
y
Agencomental Protection
Health Resources and
sAll Other
Services Administration
virEn
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
The funding reported for individual STEM education programs varied
significantly, and many of the programs have been funded for more than 10
years. The funding ranged from $4,000 for an USDA-sponsored program that
offered scholarships to U.S. citizens seeking bachelor's degrees at
Hispanic-serving institutions, to about $547 million for a NIH grant
program that is designed to develop and enhance research training
opportunities for individuals in biomedical, behavioral, and clinical
research by supporting training programs at institutions of higher
education. As shown in table 5, most programs were funded at $5 million or
less and 13 programs were funded at more than $50 million in fiscal year
2004. About half of the STEM education programs were first funded after
1998. The oldest program began in 1936, and 72 programs are over 10
years old.10 Appendix III describes the STEM education programs that
received funding of $10 million or more during fiscal year 2004 or 2005.11
Table 5: Funding Levels for Federal STEM Education Programs in Fiscal Year 2004
Numbers of STEM Percentage of total STEM
Program funding levels education programs education programs
Less than $1 million 93
$1 million to $5 51
million
$5.1 million to $10 19
million
$10.1 million to $50 31
million
More than $50 million 13
Total 207
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
Federal Agencies Reported Most STEM Programs Had Multiple Goals and Were
Targeted to Multiple Groups
Agencies reported that most of the STEM education programs had multiple
goals. Survey respondents reported that 80 percent (165 of 207) of the
education programs had multiple goals, with about half of these
identifying four or more goals for individual programs.12 Moreover,
according to the survey responders, few programs had a single goal. For
example, 2 programs were identified as having one goal of attracting and
preparing students at any education level to pursue coursework in the STEM
areas, while 112 programs identified this as one of multiple goals. Table
6 shows the program goals and numbers of STEM programs aligned with them.
10Six survey respondents did not include the date the program was
initially funded.
11Fiscal year 2005 funding levels were not available for all of the 207
STEM education programs.
12Three survey respondents did not identify the program goals.
Table 6: Program Goals and Numbers of STEM Programs with One or Multiple
Goals
Programs with Total programs
Programs with multiple goals with this goal
Program goal only this goal including this and other
goal goal(s)
Attract and prepare students
at any education level to
pursue coursework in STEM 2 112
areas
Attract students to pursue
degrees (2-year through
Ph.D.)
and postdoctoral appointments 6 131
Provide growth and research
opportunities for college and
graduate students in STEM 3 100
fields
Attract graduates to pursue 17 114
careers in STEM fields
Improve teacher education in 8 65
STEM areas
Improve or expand the
capacity of institutions to
promote
or foster STEM fields 3 87
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
The STEM education programs provided financial assistance to students,
educators, and institutions. According to the survey responses, 131
programs provided financial support for students or scholars, and 84
programs provided assistance for teacher and faculty development.13 Many
of the programs provided financial assistance to multiple beneficiaries,
as shown in table 7.
Table 7: Numbers of STEM Programs with One or Multiple Types of Assistance and
Beneficiaries
Programs that Programs that Total programs
provide
provide only this type and that provide
this other this
Type of assistance type of types of type of
assistance assistance assistance
Financial support for students 54 77
or scholars
Institutional support to
improve educational
quality 6 70
Support for teacher and faculty 12 72
development
Institutional physical 1 26
infrastructure support
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
Most of the programs were not targeted to a specific group but aimed to
serve a wide range of students, educators, and institutions. Of the 207
programs, 54 were targeted to 1 group and 151 had multiple target
13One survey respondent did not identify the type of assistance supported
by the program.
groups.14 In addition, many programs were targeted to the same group. For
example, while 12 programs were aimed solely at graduate students, 88
other programs had graduate students as one of multiple target groups.
Fewer programs were targeted to elementary and secondary teachers and
kindergarten through 12th grade students than to other target groups.
Table 8 summarizes the numbers of STEM programs targeted to one group and
multiple groups.
Table 8: Numbers of STEM Programs Targeted to One Group and Multiple Groups
Targeted to Targeted to this Total programs Targeted group only this group
and other groups targeted to this group
Kindergarten through grade 12 students
Elementary school students 0 28
Middle or junior high school students 1 33
High school students 3 50
Undergraduate students
2-year college students 1 57
4-year college students 4 92
Graduate students and postdoctoral scholars
Graduate students 12 88
Postdoctoral scholars 12 58
Teachers, college faculty and instructional staff
Elementary school teachers 0 39
Secondary school teachers 3 47
College faculty or instructional staff 4 75
Institutions 5 77
Source: GAO survey responses from13 federal agencies.
Some programs limited participation to certain groups. According to survey
respondents, U.S. citizenship was required to be eligible for 53 programs,
and an additional 75 programs were open only to U.S. citizens or permanent
residents.15 About one-fourth of the programs had no
14Two survey respondents did not identify the group targeted by the
program.
15Lawful permanent residents, also commonly referred to as immigrants, are
legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United
States. They may be issued immigrant visas by the Department of State
overseas or adjusted to permanent resident status by the Department of
Homeland Security in the United States.
citizenship requirement, and 24 programs allowed noncitizens or permanent
residents to participate in some cases. According to a NSF official,
students receiving scholarships or fellowships through NSF programs must
be U.S. citizens or permanent residents. In commenting on a draft of this
report, NSF reported that these restrictions are considered to be an
effective strategy to support its goal of creating a diverse, competitive,
and globally-engaged U.S. workforce of scientists, engineers,
technologists, and well-prepared citizens. Officials at two universities
said that some research programs are not open to non-citizens. Such
restrictions may reflect concerns about access to sensitive areas. In
addition to these restrictions, some programs are designed to increase
minority representation in STEM fields. For example, NSF sponsors a
program called Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences to
increase participation by African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native
Americans (American Indians and Alaskan Natives), Native Pacific Islanders
(Polynesians or Micronesians), and persons with disabilities.
Agency Officials Reported That Evaluations Were Completed or Under Way for
About Half of the Federal Programs
Evaluations had been completed or were under way for about half of the
STEM education programs. Agency officials responded that evaluations were
completed for 55 of the 207 programs and that for 49 programs, evaluations
were under way at the time we conducted our survey. Agency officials
provided us documentation for evaluations of 43 programs, and most of the
completed evaluations reviewed reported that the programs met their
objectives or goals. For example, a March 2004 report on the outcomes and
impacts of NSF's Minority Postdoctoral Research Fellowships program
concluded that there was strong qualitative and quantitative evidence that
this program is meeting its broad goal of preparing scientists from those
ethnic groups that are significantly underrepresented in tenured U.S.
science and engineering professorships and for positions of leadership in
industry and government.
However, evaluations had not been done for 103 programs, some of which
have been operating for many years. Of these, it may have been too soon to
expect evaluations for about 32 programs that were initially funded in
fiscal year 2002 or later. However, of the remaining 71 programs, 17 have
been operating for over 15 years and have not been evaluated. In
commenting on a draft of this report NSF noted that all of its programs
undergo evaluation and that it uses a variety of mechanisms for program
evaluation. We reported in 2003 that several agencies used various
strategies to develop and improve evaluations.16 Evaluations play an
important role in improving program operations and ensuring an efficient
use of federal resources. Although some of the STEM education programs are
small in terms of their funding levels, evaluations can be designed to
consider the size of the program and the costs associated with measuring
outcomes and collecting data.
A Subcommittee Was Established in 2003 to Help Coordinate STEM Education
Programs among Federal Agencies
Coordination of federal STEM education programs has been limited. In
January 2003 the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), Committee
on Science (COS), established a subcommittee on education and workforce
development. The purpose of the subcommittee is to advise and assist COS
and NSTC on policies, procedures, and programs relating to STEM education
and workforce development. According to its charter, the subcommittee will
address education and workforce policy issues and research and development
efforts that focus on STEM education issues at all levels, as well as
current and projected STEM workforce needs, trends, and issues. The
members include representatives from 20 agencies and offices-the 13
agencies that responded to our survey as well as the Departments of
Defense, State, and Justice, and the Office of Science and Technology
Policy, the Office of Management and Budget, the Domestic Policy Council,
and the National Economic Council. The subcommittee has working groups on
(1) human capacity in STEM areas, (2) minority programs, (3) effective
practices for assessing federal efforts, and (4) issues affecting graduate
and postdoctoral researchers. The Human Capacity in STEM working group is
focused on three strategic initiatives: defining and assessing national
STEM needs, including programs and research projects; identifying and
analyzing the available data regarding the STEM workforce; and creating
and implementing a comprehensive national response that enhances STEM
workforce development.
NSTC reported that as of June 2005 the subcommittee had a number of
accomplishments and projects under way that related to attracting students
to STEM fields. For example, it has (1) surveyed federal agency education
programs designed to increase the participation of women and
underrepresented minorities in STEM studies; (2) inventoried federal
fellowship programs for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows; and
(3) coordinated the Excellence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and
16GAO, Program Evaluation: An Evaluation Culture and Collaborative
Partnerships Help Build Agency Capacity, GAO-03-454 (Washington, D.C.: May
2, 2003).
Numbers of Students, Graduates, and Employees in STEM Fields Generally
Increased, but Percentage Changes Varied
Mathematics Education Week activities, which provide an opportunity for
the nation's schools to focus on improving mathematics and science
education. In addition, the subcommittee is developing a Web site for
federal educational resources in STEM fields and a set of principles that
agencies would use in setting levels of support for graduate and
postdoctoral fellowships and traineeships.
While the total numbers of students, graduates, and employees have
increased in STEM fields, percentage changes for women, minorities, and
international students varied during the periods reviewed. The increase in
the percentage of students in STEM fields was greater than the increase in
non-STEM fields, but the change in percentage of graduates in STEM fields
was less than the percentage change in non-STEM fields. Moreover,
employment increased more in STEM fields than in non-STEM fields. Further,
changes in the percentages of minority students varied by race or ethnic
group, international graduates continued to earn about a third or more of
the advanced degrees in three STEM fields, and there was no statistically
significant change in the percentage of women employees. Figure 2
summarizes key changes in the students, graduates, and employees in STEM
fields.
Figure 2: Key Changes in Students, Graduates, and Employees in STEM Fields
Source: GAO analysis of CPS, IPEDS, and NPSAS data; graphics in part by Art
Explosion.
Numbers of Students in STEM Fields Grew, but This Increase Varied by
Education Level and Student Characteristics
Total enrollments of students in STEM fields have increased, and the
percentage change was greater for STEM fields than non-STEM fields, but
the percentage of students in STEM fields remained about the same. From
the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, total
enrollments in STEM fields increased 21 percent-more than the 11 percent
enrollment increase in non-STEM fields. The number of students enrolled in
STEM fields represented 23 percent of all students enrolled during the
2003-2004 academic year, a modest increase from the 21 percent these
students constituted in the 1995-1996 academic year. Table 9 summarizes
the changes in overall enrollment across all education levels from the
1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year.
Table 9: Estimated Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of Students in
the STEM and Non-STEM Fields across All Education Levels, Academic Years
19951996 and 2003-2004
Academic year Academic year 1995-1996 2003-2004
Non- Non-
Enrollment measures STEM STEM STEM STEM
Students enrolled (in
thousands) 4,132 15,243 4,997 16,883
Percentage of total
enrollment 21 79 23
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
Note: The totals for STEM and non-STEM enrollment include students in
bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs as well as students enrolled
in certificate, associate's, other undergraduate, firstprofessional
degree, and post-bachelor's or post-master's certificate programs. The
percentage changes between the 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years for
STEM and non-STEM students are statistically significant. See appendix V
for confidence intervals associated with these estimates.
The increase in the numbers of students in STEM fields is mostly a result
of increases at the bachelor's and master's levels. Of the total increase
of about 865,000 students in STEM fields, about 740,000 was due to the
increase in the numbers of students at the bachelor's and master's levels.
See table 23 in appendix IV for additional information on the estimated
numbers of students in STEM fields in academic years 1995-1996 and
20032004.
The percentage of students in STEM fields who are women increased from the
1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, and in the
2003-2004 academic year women students constituted at least 50 percent of
the students in 3 STEM fields-biological sciences, psychology, and social
sciences. However, in the 2003-2004 academic year, men students continued
to outnumber women students in STEM fields, and men constituted an
estimated 54 percent of the STEM students overall. In addition, men
constituted at least 76 percent of the students enrolled in computer
sciences, engineering, and technology.17 See tables 24 and 25 in appendix
IV for additional information on changes in the numbers and
17In 2004, we reported on women's participation in federally funded
science programs. Among other issues, this report discussed priorities
pertaining to compliance with provisions of Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972. For additional information, see GAO, Gender Issues:
Women's Participation in the Sciences Has Increased, but Agencies Need to
Do More to Ensure Compliance with Title IX, GAO-04-639, (Washington, D.C.:
July 22, 2004).
percentages of women students in the STEM fields for academic years
1995-1996 and 2003-2004.
While the numbers of domestic minority students in STEM fields also
increased, changes in the percentages of minority students varied by
racial or ethnic group. For example, Hispanic students increased 33
percent, from the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year.
In comparison, the number of African American students increased about 69
percent. African American students increased from 9 to 12 percent of all
students in STEM fields while Asian/Pacific Islander students continued to
constitute about 7 percent. Table 10 shows the numbers and percentages of
minority students in STEM fields for the 1995-1996 academic year and the
2003-2004 academic year.
Table 10: Estimated Percentage Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of
Domestic Minority Students in STEM fields for All Education Levels for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
Percentage Minority Minority
change in group as a group as a
Numbers of Numbers of the numbers percentage percentage
of of of
students, students, students students in students
1995- 2003- between STEM in STEM
1996 (in 2004 (in academic fields, fields,
years 1995- academic academic
Race or thousands) thousands) 1996 and year year
ethnicity 2003-2004 1995-1996 2003-2004
Black or
African
American 360 608 +69 9
Asian/Pacific
Islander 289 345 +19 7
Hispanic or
Latino
origin 366 489 +33 9
American Indian 18 38 +107 0
Other/Multiple
minorities 29 166 +475 1
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
Note: All percentage changes are statistically significant. See appendix V
for confidence intervals associated with these estimates.
From the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, the
number of international students in STEM fields increased by about 57
percent solely because of an increase at the bachelor's level. The numbers
of international students in STEM fields at the master's and doctoral
levels declined, with the largest decline occurring at the doctoral level.
Table 11 shows the numbers and percentage changes in international
students from the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year.
Table 11: Estimated Changes in Numbers of International Students in STEM
fields by Education Levels from the 1995-1996 Academic Year to the
2003-2004 Academic Year
Number of Number of
international international
Education level students, 1995-1996 students, 2003-2004 Percentage
change
Bachelor's 31,858 139,875 +339
Master's 40,025 22,384
Doctoral 36,461 7,582
Total 108,344 169,841 +57
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
Note: Changes in enrollment between the 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic
years are significant at the 95 percent confidence level for international
students and for all education levels. See appendix V for confidence
intervals associated with these estimates.
According to the Institute of International Education, from the 2002-2003
academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, the number of international
students declined for the first time in over 30 years, and that was the
second such decline since the 1954-1955 academic year, when the institute
began collecting and reporting data on international students.18 Moreover,
in November 2004, the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) reported a 6
percent decline in first-time international graduate student enrollment
from 2003 to 2004. Following a decade of steady growth, CGS also reported
that the number of first-time international students studying in the
United States decreased between 6 percent and 10 percent for 3 consecutive
years.
Total Numbers of Graduates with STEM Degrees Increased, but Numbers
Decreased in Some Fields, and Percentages of Minority Graduates at the
Master's and Doctoral Levels Did Not Change
The number of graduates with degrees in STEM fields increased by 8 percent
from the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year. However,
during this same period the number of graduates with degrees in non-STEM
fields increased by 30 percent. From academic year 1994-1995 to academic
year 2002-2003, the percentage of graduates with STEM degrees decreased
from 32 percent to 28 percent of total graduates. Table 12 provides data
on the changes in the numbers and percentages of graduates in STEM and
non-STEM fields.
18Institute of International Education, Open Doors: Report on
International Educational Exchange, 2004, New York.
Table 12: Numbers of Graduates and Percentage Changes in STEM and Non-STEM
Fields across All Degree Levels from the 1994-1995 Academic Year to the
2002-2003 Academic Year
STEM fields Non-STEM fields
Percentage Percentage
Graduation 1994-1995 2002-2003 change 1994-1995 2002-2003 change
measures
Graduates
(in 519 560 +8 1,112 1,444 +30
thousands)
Percentage
of total 32 28 -4 68 72 +4
graduates
Source: GAO calculations based upon IPEDS data.
Decreases in the numbers of graduates occurred in some STEM fields at each
education level, but particularly at the doctoral level. The numbers of
graduates with bachelor's degrees decreased in four of eight STEM fields,
the numbers with master's degrees decreased in five of eight fields, and
the numbers with doctoral degrees decreased in six of eight STEM fields.
At the doctoral level, these declines ranged from 14 percent in
mathematics/computer sciences to 74 percent in technology. Figure 3 shows
the percentage change in graduates with degrees in STEM fields from the
1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year.
Figure 3: Percentage Changes in Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral
Graduates in STEM Fields from Academic Year 19941995 to Academic Year
2002-2003
Percent change
72 -74
sciences
Biological/agricultural
th,Ear
and ocean sciences
atmospheric, Engineering sciences
Mathematics/computer
ysical sciencesPh
Psychology Social sciences hnology
ceT
Bachelor's
Master's
Ph.D.s
Source: GAO calculations based upon IPEDS data.
From the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year, the total
number of women graduates increased in four of the eight fields, and the
percentages of women earning degrees in STEM fields increased in six of
the eight fields at all three educational levels. Conversely, the total
number of men graduates decreased, and the percentages of men graduates
declined in six of the eight fields at all three levels from the 1994-1995
academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year. However, men continued to
constitute over 50 percent of the graduates in five of eight fields at all
three education levels. Table 13 summarizes the numbers of graduates by
gender, level, and field. Table 26 in appendix IV provides additional data
on the percentages of men and women graduates by STEM field and education
level.
Table 13: Numbers and Percentage Changes in Men and Women Graduates with
STEM Degrees by Education Level and Field for Academic Years 1994-1995 and
2002-2003
Number of men Percentage Number of women Percentage
graduates change in graduates change in
Education men women
level STEM field 1994-1995 2002-2003 1994-1995 graduates
graduates 2002-2003
Bachelor's Biological/agricultural
level sciences 36,108 23,266 -36 35,648 35,546
Earth, atmospheric, and
ocean sciences 2,954 2,243 -24 1,524 1,626 +7
Engineering 52,562 48,214 -8 10,960 11,709 +7
Mathematics and computer
sciences 25,258 46,381 +84 13,651 20,436 +50
Physical sciences 9,607 8,739 -9 5,292 6,222 +18
Psychology 19,664 18,616 -5 53,010 64,470 +22
Social sciences 56,643 63,465 +12 56,624 77,701 +37
Technology 14,349 9,174 -36 1,602 1,257
Master's Biological/agricultural
level sciences 4,768 2,413 -49 4,340 2,934
Earth, atmospheric, and
ocean sciences 1,032 805 -22 451 552 +22
Engineering 24,031 20,258 -16 4,643 5,271 +14
Mathematics and computer
sciences 10,398 14,531 +40 4,474 7,517 +68
Physical sciences 2,958 2,350 -21 1,283 1,299 +1
Psychology 4,013 3,645 -9 10,319 12,433 +20
Social sciences 11,952 11,057 -7 11,398 13,674 +20
Technology 927 467 -50 222 173
Doctoral Biological/agricultural
level sciences 3,616 1,526 -58 2,160 1,161
Earth, atmospheric, and
ocean sciences 488 315 -35 134 125 -7
Engineering 5,401 4,159 -23 728 839 +15
Mathematics and computer
sciences 1,690 1,378 -18 434 439 +1
Physical sciences 2,939 2,396 -18 922 892 -3
Psychology 1,529 1,380 -10 2,511 3,086 +23
Social sciences 2,347 2,111 -10 1,463 1,729 +18
Technology 24 7 -71 3 0 -100
Source: GAO calculations based upon
IPEDS data.
The total numbers of domestic minority graduates in STEM fields increased,
although the percentage of minority graduates with STEM degrees at the
master's or doctoral level did not change from the 1994-1995 academic year
to the 2002-2003 academic year. For example, while the number of Native
American graduates increased 37 percent, Native American graduates
remained less than 1 percent of all STEM graduates at the master's and
doctoral levels. Table 14 shows the percentages and numbers of domestic
minority graduates for the 1994-1995 academic year and the 2002-2003
academic year.
Table 14: Numbers and Percentage Changes in Domestic Minority Graduates in
STEM Fields by Education Levels and Race or Ethnicity for Academic Years
1994-1995 and 2002-2003
Number of Number of Percentage of
Percentage of
Percentage total
graduates in graduates in graduates total
graduates
STEM fields, STEM fields, change in in STEM
fields, in STEM fields,
Race or ethnicity Degree 1994-1995 2002-2003 graduates 1994-1995
Level 2002-2003
Black or African Total 33,121 44,475 +34 6 8
American Bachelor's 28,236 37,195 +32 5 7
Master's 4,358 6,588 +51 1
Doctoral 527 692 +31 0
Hispanic or Latino 25,781 37,056 +44 5
origin Total
Bachelor's 22,268 32,255 +45 4
Master's 3,015 4,121 +37 1
Doctoral 498 680 +37 0
Asian/Pacific Islanders 37,393 46,941 +26 7
Total
Bachelor's 29,389 39,030 +33 6
Master's 6,064 6,814 +12 1
Doctoral 1,940 1,097 -43 0
Native Americans Total 2,488 3,409 +37 0
Bachelor's 2,115 2,903 +37 0
Master's 320 425 +33 0
Doctoral 53 81 +53 0 0
Source: GAO calculations based upon IPEDS data.
International students earned about one-third or more of the degrees at
both the master's and doctoral levels in several fields in the 1994-1995
and the 2002-2003 academic years. For example, in academic year 2002-2003,
international students earned between 45 percent and 57 percent of all
degrees in engineering and mathematics/computer sciences at the master's
and doctoral levels. However, at each level there were changes in the
numbers and percentages of international graduates. At the master's level,
the total number of international graduates increased by about 31 percent
from the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year; while the
number of graduates decreased in four of the fields and the percentages of
international graduates declined in three fields. At the doctoral level,
the total number of international graduates decreased by 12 percent, while
the percentage of international graduates increased or remained the same
in all fields. Table 15 shows the numbers and percentages of international
graduates in STEM fields.
Table 15: Changes in Numbers and Percentages of International Graduates in
STEM fields at the Master's and Doctoral Degree Levels, 1994-1995 and
2002-2003 Academic Years
1994-1995 2002-2003 Doctoral level
Percentage of Percentage of
all all
Masters' level Number graduates Number graduates
Agriculture/biological 1,549 17 633
sciences
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean
sciences 285 19 192
Engineering 9,720 34 11,512
Mathematics/computer
sciences 5,105 34 10,335
Physical sciences 1,467 35 1,171
Psychology 493 3 704
Social sciences 3,749 16 4,795
Technology 169 15 118
Total 22,537 29,460
Agriculture/biological sciences 1,616 28 743
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean
sciences 183 29 140
Engineering 3,001 49 2,853
Mathematics/computer
sciences 927 44 895 49
Physical sciences 1,290 33 1,281 39
Psychology 186 5 202 5
Social sciences 1,123 29 1,192 31
Technology 9 33 4 57
Total 8,335 7,310
Source: GAO calculations based
upon IPEDS data.
STEM Employment Rose, but the Percentage of Women Remained About the Same
and Minorities Continued to be Underrepresented
While the total number of STEM employees increased, this increase varied
across STEM fields. Employment increased by 23 percent in STEM fields as
compared to 17 percent in non-STEM fields from calendar year 1994 to
calendar year 2003. Employment increased by 78 percent in the
mathematics/computer sciences field and by 20 percent in the science field
over this period. The changes in number of employees in the engineering
and technology fields were not statistically significant. Employment
estimates from 1994 to 2003 in the STEM fields are shown in figure 4.
Figure 4: Estimated Numbers of Employees in STEM Fields from Calendar
Years 1994 through 2003
Number of employees (in millions)
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Calendar year
Science
Technology
Engineering
Mathematics/computer sciences
Source: GAO calculations based upon CPS data.
Note: Estimated number of employees have confidence intervals of within
+/-9 percent of the estimate itself. See appendix VI for confidence
intervals associated with these estimates.
From calendar years 1994 to 2003, the estimated number of women employees
in STEM fields increased from about 2.7 million to about 3.5 million.
Overall, there was not a statistically significant change in the
percentage of women employees in the STEM fields. Table 16 shows the
numbers and percentages of men and women employed in the STEM fields for
calendar years 1994 and 2003.
Table 16: Estimated Numbers and Percentages of Employees in STEM Fields by
Gender in Calendar Years 1994 and 2003 (numbers in thousands)
1994 2003
Men Women Men Women
STEM field Number Percent Number Number Percent Number
Percent Percent
Science 792 32 1,711 68 829 28 2,179
Technology 955 68 445 32 1,050 71 425
Engineering 1,658 92 *141 8 1,572 90 *169
Mathematics/
computer sciences 1,056 71 432 29 1,952 74 695
Total 4,461 62 2,729 38 5,404 61 3,467
Source: GAO calculations based upon CPS data.
Note: Estimated employee numbers noted by an asterisk have a 95 percent
confidence interval of within +/- 25 percent of the estimate itself. All
other estimated employee numbers have a 95 percent confidence interval of
within +/- 16 percent of the estimate. See appendix VI for confidence
intervals associated with these estimates. Calculations of percentages and
numbers may differ due to rounding.
In addition, the estimated number of minorities employed in the STEM
fields as well as the percentage of total STEM employees they constituted
increased, but African American and Hispanic employees remain
underrepresented relative to their percentages in the civilian labor
force.19 Between 1994 and 2003, the estimated number of African American
employees increased by about 44 percent, the estimated numbers of Hispanic
employees increased by 90 percent, as did the estimated numbers of other
minorities employed in STEM fields.20 In calendar year 2003, African
Americans comprised about 8.7 percent of STEM employees compared to about
10.7 percent of the CLF. Similarly, Hispanic employees comprised about 10
percent of STEM employees in calendar year 2003, compared to about 12.6
percent of the CLF. Table 17 shows the estimated percentages of STEM
employees by selected racial or ethnic groups in 1994 and 2003.
19On the basis of March 2004 CPS estimates, the Pew Hispanic Research
Center reported that over 10 million unauthorized immigrants resided in
the United States and that people of Hispanic and Latino origin
constituted a significant portion of these unauthorized immigrants.
20Other minorities include Asian/Pacific Islanders and American Indian or
Alaska Native.
Table 17: Estimated Percentages of STEM Employees by Selected Racial or
Ethnic Group for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003
Percentage of total Percentage of total
Race or ethnicity STEM employees, 1994 STEM employees, 2003
Black or African American 7.5 8.7
Hispanic or Latino origin 5.7 10.0
aOther minorities 4.5 6.9
Source: GAO calculations based upon CPS data.
Note: Estimated percentages have 95 percent confidence intervals of +/- 1
percentage point. Changes for African Americans between calendar years
1994 and 2003 were not statistically significant at the 95-percent
confidence level. Differences for Hispanic or Latino origin and other
minorities were statistically significant. See appendix VI for confidence
intervals associated with these estimates.
aOther minorities include Asian/Pacific Islanders and American Indian or
Alaska Native.
International employees have filled hundreds of thousands of positions,
many in STEM fields, through the H-1B visa program. However, the numbers
and types of occupations have changed over the years. We reported that
while the limit for the H-1B program was 115,000 in 1999, the number of
visas approved exceeded the limit by more than 20,000 because of problems
with the system used to track the data.21 Available data show that in
1999, the majority of the approved occupations were in STEM fields.
Specifically, an estimated 60 percent of the positions approved in fiscal
year 1999 were related to information technology and 5 percent were for
electrical/electronics engineering. By 2002, the limit for the H-1B
program had increased to 195,000, but the number approved, 79,000, did not
reach this limit. In 2003, we reported that the number of approved H1B
petitions in certain occupations had declined. For example, the number of
approvals for systems analysis/programming positions declined by
22
106,671 from 2001 to 2002.
Although the estimated total number of employees in STEM fields increased
from 1994 to 2003, according to an NSF report, many with STEM degrees were
not employed in these occupations. In 2004, NSF reported that about 67
percent of employees with degrees in science or engineering
21GAO, H-1B Foreign Workers: Better Controls Needed to Help Employers and
Protect Workers, GAO/HEHS-00-157 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 7, 2000).
22GAO, H-1B Foreign Workers: Better Tracking Needed to Help Determine H-1B
Program's Effects on U.S. Workforce, GAO-03-883 (Washington, D.C.: Sept.
10, 2003).
were employed in fields somewhat or not at all related to their degree.23
Specifically, 70 percent of employees with bachelor's degrees, 51 percent
with master's degrees, and 54 percent with doctoral degrees reported that
their employment was somewhat or not at all related to their degree in
science or engineering.
In addition to increases in the numbers of employees in STEM fields,
inflation-adjusted median annual wages and salaries increased in all four
STEM fields over the 10-year period (1994 to 2003). These increases ranged
from 6 percent in science to 15 percent in engineering. Figure 5 shows
trends in median annual wages and salaries for STEM fields.
23National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2004,
Volume 1, National Science Board, January 15, 2004.
Figure 5: Estimated Median Annual Wages and Salaries in STEM Fields for
Calendar Years 1994 through 2003
Annual wages and salaries (in thousands of dollars) 70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Calendar year
Science
Technology
Engineering
Mathematics/computer sciences
Source: GAO calculations based upon CPS data.
Note: Median annual wages and salaries have been adjusted for inflation.
Estimated median annual wages and salaries have 95 percent confidence
intervals of within +/- 2.3 percent. See appendix VI for confidence
intervals associated with these estimates.
University officials, researchers, and students identified several factors
that influenced students' decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and
occupations, and they suggested some ways to encourage more participation
in STEM fields. Specifically, university officials said and researchers
reported that the quality of teachers in kindergarten through 12th grades
and the levels of mathematics and science courses completed during high
school affected students' success in and decisions about STEM fields. In
addition, several sources noted that mentoring played a key role in the
participation of women and minorities in STEM fields. Current students
from five universities we visited generally agreed with these
observations, and several said that having good mathematics and science
instruction was important to their overall educational success.
International students' decisions about participating in STEM education
University Officials and Others Cited Several Factors That Influence Decisions
about Participation in STEM Fields and Suggested Ways to Encourage Greater
Participation
and occupations were affected by opportunities outside the United States
and the visa process. To encourage more student participation in the STEM
fields, university officials, researchers, and others have made several
suggestions, and four were made repeatedly. These suggestions focused on
teacher quality, high school students' math and science preparation,
outreach activities, and the federal role in STEM education.
Teacher Quality and Mathematics and Science Preparation Were Cited as Key
Factors Affecting Domestic Students' STEM Participation Decisions
University officials frequently cited teacher quality as a key factor that
affected domestic students' interest in and decisions about pursuing STEM
degrees and occupations. Officials at all eight universities we visited
expressed the view that a student's experience from kindergarten through
the 12th grades played a large role in influencing whether the student
pursued a STEM degree. Officials at one university we visited said that
students pursuing STEM degrees have associated their interests with
teachers who taught them good skills in mathematics or excited them about
science. On the other hand, officials at many of the universities we
visited told us that some teachers were unqualified and unable to impart
the subject matter, causing students to lose interest in mathematics and
science. For example, officials at one university we visited said that
some elementary and secondary teachers do not have sufficient training to
effectively teach students in the STEM fields and that this has an adverse
effect on what students learn in these fields and reduces the interest and
enthusiasm students express in pursuing coursework in high school, degree
programs in college, or careers in these areas.
Teacher quality issues, in general, have been cited in past reports by
Education. In 2002, Education reported that in the 1999-2000 school year,
14 to 22 percent of middle-grade students taking English, mathematics, and
science were in classes led by teachers without a major, minor, or
certification in these subjects-commonly referred to as "out-of-field"
teachers.24 Also, approximately 30 to 40 percent of the middle-grade
students in biology/life science, physical science, or English as a second
language/bilingual education classes had teachers lacking these
credentials. At the high school level, 17 percent of students enrolled in
physics and 36 percent of those enrolled in geology/earth/space science
were in classes instructed by out-of-field teachers. The percentages of
24National Center for Education Statistics, Qualifications of the Public
School Teacher Workforce: Prevalence of Out-of-Field Teaching 1987-88 to
1999-2000, May 2002, revised August 2004,Washington, D.C.
students taught by out-of-field teachers were significantly higher when
the criteria used were teacher certification and a major in the subject
taught. For example, 45 percent of the high school students enrolled in
biology/life science and approximately 30 percent of those enrolled in
mathematics, English, and social science classes had out-of-field
teachers. During the 2002-2003 school year, Education reported that the
number and distribution of teachers on waivers-which allowed prospective
teachers in classrooms while they completed their formal training-was
problematic. Also, states reported that the problem of underprepared
teachers was worse on average in districts that serve large proportions of
high-poverty children-the percentage of teachers on waivers was larger in
high-poverty school districts than all other school districts in 39
states. Moreover, in 2004, Education reported that 48 of the 50 states
granted waivers.25
In addition to teacher quality, students' high school preparation in
mathematics and science was cited by university officials and others as
affecting students' success in college-level courses and their decisions
about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations. University officials at six
of the eight universities we visited cited students' ability to opt out of
mathematics and science courses during high school as a factor that
influenced whether they would participate and succeed in the STEM fields
during undergraduate and graduate school. University officials said, for
example, that because many students had not taken higher-level mathematics
and science courses such as calculus and physics in high school, they were
immediately behind other students who were better prepared. In July 2005,
on the basis of findings from the 2004 National Assessment of Educational
Progress, the National Center for Education Statistics reported that 17
percent of the 17-year-olds reported that they had taken calculus, and
this represents the highest percentage in any previous assessment year.26
In a study that solicited the views of several hundred students who had
left the STEM fields, researchers found that the effects of inadequate
high school preparation contributed to college students' decisions to
leave the science fields.27 These researchers found
25U.S. Department of Education, The Secretary's Third Annual Report on
Teacher Quality, Office of Postsecondary Education, 2004, Washington, D.C.
26U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, The Nation's Report Card, NAEP 2004:
Trends in Academic Progress, July 2005, Washington, D.C.
27Seymour, Elaine, and Nancy M. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why
Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Westview Press, 1997, Boulder,
Colorado.
that approximately 40 percent of those college students who left the
science fields reported some problems related to high school science
preparation. The underpreparation was often linked to problems such as not
understanding calculus; lack of laboratory experience or exposure to
computers, and no introduction to theoretical material or to analytic
modes of thought. Further, 12 current students we interviewed said they
were not adequately prepared for college mathematics or science. For
example, one student stated that her high school courses had been limited
because she attended an all-girls school where the curriculum catered to
students who were not interested in STEM, and so it had been difficult to
obtain the courses that were of interest to her.
Several other factors were mentioned during our interviews with university
officials, students, and others as influencing decisions about
participation in STEM fields. These factors included relatively low pay in
STEM fields, additional tuition costs to obtain STEM degrees, lack of
commitment on the part of some students to meet the rigorous academic
demands, and the inability of some professors in STEM fields to
effectively impart their knowledge to students in the classrooms. For
example, officials from five universities said that low pay in STEM fields
relative to other fields such as law and business dissuaded students from
pursuing STEM degrees in some areas. Also, in a study that solicited the
views of college students who left the STEM fields as well as those who
continued to pursue STEM degrees, researchers found that students
experienced greater financial difficulties in obtaining their degrees
because of the extra time needed to obtain degrees in certain STEM fields.
Researchers also noted that poor teaching at the university level was the
most common complaint among students who left as well as those who
remained in STEM fields. Students reported that faculty do not like to
teach, do not value teaching as a professional activity, and therefore
lack any incentive to learn to teach effectively.28 Finally, 11 of the
students we interviewed commented about the need for professors in STEM
fields to alter their methods and to show more interest in teaching to
retain students' attention.
28Seymour and Hewitt.
Mentoring Cited as a Key Factor Affecting Women's and Minorities' STEM
Participation Decisions
University officials and students said that mentoring is important for all
students but plays a vital role in the academic experiences of women and
minorities in the STEM fields. Officials at seven of the eight
universities discussed the important role that mentors play, especially
for women and minorities in STEM fields. For example, one professor said
that mentors helped students by advising them on the best track to follow
for obtaining their degrees and achieving professional goals. Also, four
students we interviewed-three women and one man-expressed the importance
of mentors. Specifically, while all four students identified mentoring as
critical to academic success in the STEM fields, two students expressed
their satisfaction since they had mentors, while the other two students
said that it would have been helpful to have had someone who could have
been a mentor or role model.
Studies have also reported that mentors play a significant role in the
success of women and minorities in the STEM fields. In 2004, some of the
women students and faculty with whom we talked reported a strong mentor
was a crucial part in the academic training of some of the women
participating in sciences, and some women had pursued advanced degrees
because of the encouragement and support of mentors.29 In September 2000,
a congressional commission reported that women were adversely affected
throughout the STEM education pipeline and career path by a lack of role
models and mentors.30 For example, the report found that girls rejection
of mathematics and science may be partially driven by teachers, parents,
and peers when they subtly, and not so subtly, steer girls away from the
informal technical pastimes (such as working on cars, fixing bicycles, and
changing hardware on computers) and science activities (such as science
fairs and clubs) that too often were still thought of as the province of
boys. In addition, the commission reported that a greater proportion of
women switched out of STEM majors than men, relative to their
representation in the STEM major population. Reasons cited for the higher
attrition rate among women students included lack of role models, distaste
for the competitive nature of science and engineering education, and
inability to obtain adequate academic guidance or advice. Further,
according to the report, women's retention and graduation in STEM graduate
programs were affected by their interaction with faculty,
29GAO-04-639.
30Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and
Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development, Land of
Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering,
and Technology, September 2000.
integration into the department (versus isolation), and other factors,
including whether there were role models, mentors, and women faculty.
International Students' STEM Participation Decisions Were Affected by
Opportunities Outside the United States and the Visa Process
Officials at seven of the eight universities visited, along with education
policy experts, told us that competition from other countries for top
international students, and educational or work opportunities, affected
international students' decisions about studying in the United States.
They told us that other countries, including Canada, Australia, New
Zealand, and the United Kingdom, had seized the opportunity since
September 11 to compete against the United States for international
students who were among the best students in the world, especially in the
STEM fields. Also, university officials told us that students from several
countries, including China and India, were being recruited to attend
universities and get jobs in their own countries. In addition, education
organizations and associations have reported that global competition for
the best science and engineering students and scholars is under way. One
organization, NAFSA: Association of International Educators reported that
the international student market has become highly competitive, and the
United States is not competing as
31
well as other countries.
According to university officials, international students' decisions about
pursuing STEM degrees and occupations in the United States were also
influenced by the perceived unwelcoming attitude of Americans and the visa
process. Officials from three of the universities said that the perceived
unwelcoming attitude of Americans had affected the recruitment of
international students to the United States. Also, officials at six of the
eight universities visited expressed their concern about the impact of the
tightened visa procedures and/or increased security measures since
September 11 on international graduate school enrollments. For example,
officials at one university stated that because of the time needed to
process visas, a few students had missed their class start dates.
Officials from one university told us that they were being more proactive
in helping new international students navigate the visa system, to the
extent possible. While some university officials acknowledged that visa
processing had significantly improved, since 2003 several education
associations have
31NAFSA: Association of International Educators, In America's Interest:
Welcoming International Students, Report of the Strategic Task Force on
International Student Access, January 14, 2003, Washington, D.C.
requested further changes in U.S. visa policies because of the lengthy
procedures and time needed to obtain approval to enter the country.
We have reported on various aspects of the visa process, made several
recommendations, and noted that some improvements have been made. In
October 2002 we cited the need for a clear policy on how to balance
national security concerns with the desire to facilitate legitimate travel
when issuing visas and we made several recommendations to help improve the
visa process.32 In 2003, we reported that the Departments of State,
Homeland Security, and Justice could more effectively manage the visa
function if they had clear and comprehensive policies and procedures and
increased agency coordination and information sharing.33 In February 2004
and February 2005, we reported on the State Department's efforts to
improve the program for issuing visas to international science students
and scholars. In 2004 we found that the time to adjudicate a visa depended
largely on whether an applicant had to undergo a security check known as
Visas Mantis, which is designed to protect against sensitive technology
transfers. Based on a random sample of Visas Mantis cases for science
students and scholars, it took State an average of 67 days to complete the
process.34 In 2005, we reported a significant decline in Visas Mantis
processing times and in the number of cases pending more than 60 days.35
We also reported that, in some cases, science students and scholars can
obtain a visa within 24 hours.
We have also issued several reports on SEVIS operations. In June 2004 we
noted that when SEVIS began operating, significant problems were
reported.36 For example, colleges and universities and exchange programs
had trouble gaining access to the system, and when access was obtained,
these users' sessions would "time out" before they could complete their
tasks. In that report we also noted that SEVIS performance had improved,
32GAO, Border Security: Visa Process Should Be Strengthened as an
Antiterrorism Tool, GAO-03-132NI (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2002).
33GAO, Border Security: New Policies and Increased Interagency
Coordination Needed to Improve Visa Process, GAO-03-1013T (Washington, D.
C.: July 15, 2003).
34GAO, Border Security: Improvements Needed to Reduce Time Taken to
Adjudicate Visas for Science Students and Scholars, GAO-04-371
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2004).
35GAO-05-198.
36GAO, Homeland Security: Performance of Information System to Monitor
Foreign Students and Exchange Visitors Has Improved, but Issues Remain,
GAO-04-690 (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 2004).
but that several key system performance requirements were not being
measured. In March 2005, we reported that the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) had taken steps to address our recommendations and that
educational organizations generally agreed that SEVIS performance had
continued to improve.37 However, educational organizations continued to
cite problems, which they believe created hardships for students and
exchange visitors.
Several Suggestions Were Made to Encourage More Participation in the STEM
Fields
To increase the number of students entering STEM fields, officials from
seven universities and others stated that teacher quality needs to
improve. Officials of one university said that kindergarten through 12th
grade classrooms need teachers who are knowledgeable in the mathematics
and science content areas. As previously noted, Education has reported on
the extent to which classes have been taught by teachers with little or no
content knowledge in the STEM fields. The Congressional Commission on the
Advancement of Women and Minorities reported that teacher effectiveness is
the most important element in a good education.38 The commission also
suggested that boosting teacher effectiveness can do more to improve
education than any other single factor. States are taking action to meet
NCLBA's requirement of having all teachers of core academic subjects be
highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.
University officials and some students suggested that better preparation
and mandatory courses in mathematics and science were needed for students
during their kindergarten through 12th grade school years. Officials from
five universities suggested that mandatory mathematics and science
courses, especially in high school, may lead to increased student interest
and preparation in the STEM fields. With a greater interest and depth of
knowledge, students would be better prepared and more inclined to pursue
STEM degrees in college. Further, nearly half of the students who replied
to this question suggested that students needed additional mathematics and
science training prior to college. However, adding
37GAO, Homeland Security: Performance of Foreign Student and Exchange
Visitor Information System Continues to Improve, but Issues Remain,
GAO-05-440T (Washington, D.C.: March 17, 2005).
38Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and
Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development, Land of
Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering,
and Technology, September 2000.
mathematics and science classes has resource implications, since more
teachers in these subjects would be needed. Also this change could require
curriculum policy changes that would take time to implement.
More outreach, especially to women and minorities from kindergarten
through the 12th grade, was suggested by university officials, students,
and other organizations. Officials from six of the universities we visited
suggested that increased outreach activities are needed to help create
more interest in mathematics and science for younger students. For
example, at one university we visited, officials told us that through
inviting students to their campuses or visiting local schools, they have
provided some students with opportunities to engage in science
laboratories and hands-on activities that foster interest and excitement
for students and can make these fields more relevant in their lives.
Officials from another university told us that these experiences were
especially important for women and minorities who might not have otherwise
had these opportunities. The current students we interviewed also
suggested more outreach activities. Specifically, two students said that
outreach was needed to further stimulate students' interest in the STEM
fields. One organization, Building Engineering and Science Talent (BEST),
suggested that research universities increase their presence in
prekindergarten through 12th grade mathematics and science education in
order to strengthen domestic students' interests and abilities. BEST
reported that one model producing results entailed universities adopting
students from low-income school districts from 7th through 12th grades and
providing them advanced instruction in algebra, chemistry, physics, and
trigonometry. However, officials at one university told us that because of
limited resources, their efforts were constrained and only a few students
would benefit from this type of outreach.
Furthermore, university officials from the eight schools and other
education organizations made suggestions regarding the role of the federal
government. University officials suggested that the federal government
could enhance its role in STEM education by providing more effective
leadership through developing and implementing a national agenda for STEM
education and increasing federal funding for academic research. Officials
at six universities suggested that the federal government undertake a new
initiative modeled after the National Defense Education Act of 1958,
enacted in response to the former Soviet Union's achievement in its space
program, which provided new funding for mathematics and science education
and training at all education levels. In June 2005, CGS called for a
renewed commitment to graduate education by the federal government through
actions such as providing funds to support students
trained at the doctoral level in the sciences, technology, engineering,
and mathematics; expanding U.S. citizen participation in doctoral study in
selected fields through graduate support awarded competitively to
universities across the country; requiring recruitment, outreach, and
mentoring activities that promote greater participation and success,
especially for underrepresented groups; and fostering interdisciplinary
research preparation. In August 2003, the National Science Board
recommended that the federal government direct substantial new support to
students and institutions in order to improve success in science and
engineering studies by domestic undergraduate students from all
demographic groups. According to this report, such support could include
scholarships and other forms of financial assistance to students,
incentives to institutions to expand and improve the quality of their
science and engineering programs in areas in which degree attainment is
insufficient, financial support to community colleges to increase the
success of students in transferring to 4-year science and engineering
programs, and expanded funding for programs that best succeed in
graduating underrepresented minorities and women in science and
engineering. BEST also suggested that the federal government allocate
additional resources to expand the mathematics and science education
opportunities for underrepresented groups. However, little is known about
how well federal resources have been used in the past. Changes that would
require additional federal funds would likely have an impact on other
federal programs, given the nation's limited resources and growing fiscal
imbalance, and changing the federal role could take several years.
While the total numbers of STEM graduates have increased, some fields have
experienced declines, especially at the master's and doctoral levels.
Given the trends in the numbers and percentages of students pursuing STEM
degrees, particularly advanced degrees, and recent developments that have
influenced international students' decisions about pursuing degrees in the
United States, it is uncertain whether the number of STEM graduates will
be sufficient to meet future academic and employment needs and help the
country maintain its technological competitive advantage. Moreover, it is
too early to tell if the declines in international graduate student
enrollments will continue in the future. In terms of employment, despite
some gains, the percentage of women in the STEM workforce has not changed
significantly, minority employees remain underrepresented, and many with
degrees in STEM fields are not employed in STEM occupations.
Concluding Observations
Agency Comments
and Our Evaluation
To help improve the trends in the numbers of students, graduates, and
employees in STEM fields, university officials and others made several
suggestions, such as increasing the federal commitment to STEM education
programs. However, before making changes, it is important to know the
extent to which existing STEM education programs are appropriately
targeted and making the best use of available federal resources.
Additionally, in an era of limited financial resources and growing federal
deficits, information about the effectiveness of these programs can help
guide policy makers and program managers.
We received written comments on a draft of this report from Commerce, the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), NSF, and NSTC. These
comments are reprinted in appendixes VII, VIII, IX, and X, respectively.
We also received technical comments from the Departments of Commerce,
Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Labor, and Transportation;
and the Environmental Protection Agency and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, which we incorporated when appropriate.
In commenting on a draft of this report, Commerce, HHS, and NSTC commended
GAO for this work. Commerce explicitly concurred with several findings and
agreed with our overall conclusion. However, Commerce suggested that we
revise the conclusion to point out that despite overall increases in STEM
students, the numbers of graduates in certain fields have declined. We
modified the concluding observations to make this point. HHS agreed with
our conclusion that it is important to evaluate ongoing programs to
determine the extent to which they are achieving their desired results.
The comments from NSTC cited improvements made to help ensure that
international students, exchange visitors, and scientists are able to
apply for and receive visas in a timely manner. We did not make any
changes to the report since we had cited another GAO product that
discussed such improvements in the visa process.
NSF commented about several of our findings. NSF stated that our program
evaluations finding may be misleading largely because the type of
information GAO requested and accepted from agencies was limited to
program level evaluations and did not include evaluations of individual
underlying projects. NSF suggested that we include information on the
range of approaches used to assure program effectiveness. Our finding is
based on agency officials' responses to a survey question that did not
limit or stipulate the types of evaluations that could have been included.
Nonetheless, we modified the report to acknowledge that NSF uses various
approaches to evaluate its programs.
NSF criticized the methodology we used to support our finding on the
factors that influence decisions about pursuing STEM fields and suggested
that we make it clearer in the body of the report that the findings are
based on interviews with educators and administrators from 8 colleges and
universities, and responses from 31 students. Also, NSF suggested that we
improve the report by including corroborating information from reports and
studies. Our finding was not limited to interviews at the 8 colleges and
universities and responses from 31 current students but was also based on
interviews with numerous representatives and policy experts from various
organizations as well as findings from research and reports-which are
cited in the body of the report. Using this approach, we were able to
corroborate the testimonial evidence with data from reports and research
as well as to determine whether information in the reports and research
remained accurate by seeking the views of those currently teaching or
studying in STEM fields. As NSF noted, this approach yielded reasonable
observations. Additional information about our methodology is listed in
appendix I, and we added a bibliography that identifies the reports and
research used during the course of this review.
NSF also commented that the report mentions the NSTC efforts for
interagency collaboration, but does not mention other collaboration
efforts such as the Federal Interagency Committee on Education and the
Federal Interagency Coordinating Council. NSF also pointed out that
interagency collaboration occurs at the program level. We did not modify
the report in response to this comment. In conducting our work, we
determined that the NSTC effort was the primary mechanism for interagency
collaboration focused on STEM programs. The coordinating groups cited by
NSF are focused on different issues. The Federal Interagency Committee on
Education was established to coordinate the federal programs, policies,
and practices affecting education broadly, and the Federal Interagency
Coordinating Council was established to minimize duplication of programs
and activities relating to children with disabilities.
In addition, NSF provided information to clarify examples related to their
programs that we cited in the report, stated that some data categories
were not clear, and commented on the graduate level enrollment data we
used in the report. NSF pointed out that while its program called
Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences is designed to
increase participation by minorities, it does not limit eligibility to
minorities. Also, NSF noted that while the draft report correctly
indicated
that students receiving scholarships or fellowships from NSF must be U.S.
citizens or permanent residents, the reason given for limiting
participation in these programs in the draft report was not accurate.
According to NSF, these restrictions are considered to be an effective
strategy to support its goal of creating a diverse, competitive and
globally engaged U.S. workforce of scientists, engineers, technologists
and well prepared citizens. We revised the report to reflect these
changes. Further, NSF commented that the data categories were not clear,
particularly the technology degrees and occupations, and that the data did
not include associate degrees. We added information that lists all of the
occupations included in the analysis, and we added footnotes to clarify
which data included associate degrees and which ones did not. In addition,
NSF commented that the graduate level enrollment data for international
students based on NPSAS data are questionable in comparison with other
available data and that this may be because the NPSAS data include a
relatively small sample for graduate education. We considered using NPSAS
and other data but decided to use the NPSAS data for two reasons: NPSAS
data were more comprehensive and more current. Specifically, the NPSAS
data were available through the 2003-2004 academic year and included
numbers and characteristics of students enrolled for all degree
fields-STEM and non-STEM-for all education levels, and citizenship
information.
Copies of this report are being sent to the Secretaries of Agriculture,
Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Interior, Homeland
Security, Labor, and Transportation; the Administrators for the
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and
the National Science and Technology Council; appropriate congressional
committees; and interested parties. Copies will be made available to
others upon request. The report is also available on GAO's Web site at
http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
me
on (202) 512-7215 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are
listed in appendix VII.
Sincerely yours,
Cornelia M. Ashby, Director
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Objectives
Scope and Methodology
Survey
The objectives of our study were to determine (1) the number of federal
civilian education programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were
specifically designed to increase the number of students and graduates
pursuing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) degrees
and occupations, or improve educational programs in STEM fields, and what
agencies report about their effectiveness; (2) how the numbers,
percentages, and characteristics of students, graduates, and employees in
STEM fields have changed over the years; and (3) factors cited by
educators and others as influencing people's decisions about pursuing STEM
degrees and occupations, and suggestions to encourage greater
participation in STEM fields.
In conducting our review, we used multiple methodologies. We (1) conducted
a survey of federal departments and agencies that sponsored education
programs specifically designed to increase the number of students and
graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or improve educational
programs in STEM fields; (2) obtained and analyzed data, including the
most recent data available, on students, graduates, and employees in STEM
fields and occupations; (3) visited eight colleges and universities; (4)
reviewed reports and studies; and (5) interviewed agency officials,
representatives and policy experts from various organizations, and current
students. We conducted our work between October 2004 and October 2005 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
To provide Congress with a better understanding of what programs federal
agencies were supporting to increase the nation's pool of scientists,
technologists, engineers, and mathematicians, we designed a survey to
determine (1) the number of federal education programs (prekindergarten
through postdoctorate) designed to increase the quantity of students and
graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or improve the educational
programs in STEM fields and (2) what agencies reported about the
effectiveness of these programs. The survey asked the officials to
describe the goals, target population, and funding levels for fiscal years
2003, 2004, and 2005 of such programs. In addition, the officials were
asked when the programs began and if the programs had been or were being
evaluated.
We identified the agencies likely to support STEM education programs by
reviewing the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and the Department of
Education's Eisenhower National Clearinghouse, Guidebook of Federal
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Resources for K-12 Mathematics and Science, 2004-05. Using these
resources, we identified 15 agencies with STEM education programs. The
survey was conducted via e-mail using an ActiveX enabled MSWord
attachment. A contact point was designated for each agency, and
questionnaires were sent to that individual. One questionnaire was
completed for each program the agency sponsored. Agency officials were
asked to provide confirming documentation for their responses whenever
possible.
The questionnaire was forwarded to agencies on February 15, 2005, and
responses were received through early May 2005. We received 244 completed
surveys and determined that 207 of them met the criteria for STEM
programs. The following agencies participated in our survey: the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Homeland
Security, Interior, Labor, and Transportation. In addition, the Health
Resources and Services Administration, Indian Health Service, and National
Institutes of Health, all part of Health and Human Services, took part in
the survey. Also participating were the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and the
National Science Foundation. Labor's programs did not meet our criteria
for 2004 and the Department of Defense (DOD) did not submit a survey.
According to DOD officials, DOD needed 3 months to complete the survey and
therefore could not provide responses within the time frames of our work.
We obtained varied amounts of documentation from 13 civilian agencies for
the 207 STEM education programs funded in 2004 and information about the
effectiveness of some programs.
Because we administered the survey to all of the known federal agencies
sponsoring STEM education programs, our results are not subject to
sampling error. However, the practical difficulties of conducting any
survey may introduce other types of errors, commonly referred to as
nonsampling errors. For example, differences in how a particular question
is interpreted, the sources of information available to respondents in
answering a question, or the types of people who do not respond can
introduce unwanted variability into the survey results. We included steps
in the development of the survey, the collection of data, and the editing
and analysis of data for the purpose of minimizing such nonsampling
errors. To reduce nonsampling error, the questionnaire was reviewed by
survey specialists and pretested in person with three officials from
agencies familiar with STEM education programs to develop a questionnaire
that was relevant, easy to comprehend, unambiguous, and unbiased. We made
changes to the content and format of the questionnaire based on the
specialists' reviews and the results of the pretests. To further
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Analyses of Student, Graduate, and Employee Data
reduce nonsampling error, data for this study returned electronically were
entered directly into the instrument by the respondents and converted into
a database for analysis. Completed questionnaires returned as hard copy
were keypunched, and a sample of these records was verified by comparing
them with their corresponding questionnaires, and any errors were
corrected. When the data were analyzed, a second, independent analyst
checked all computer programs. Finally, to assess the reliability of key
data obtained from our survey about some of the programs, we compared the
responses with the documentation provided, or we independently researched
the information from other publicly available sources.
To determine how the numbers and characteristics of students, graduates,
and employees in STEM fields have changed, we obtained and analyzed data
from the Department of Education (Education) and the Department of Labor.
Specifically, we analyzed the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study
(NPSAS) data and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System
(IPEDS) data from the Department of Education's National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES), and we analyzed data from the Department of
Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) Current Population Survey (CPS).
Based on National Science Foundation's categorization of STEM fields, we
developed STEM fields of study from NPSAS and IPEDS, and identified
occupations from the CPS. Using these data sources, we developed nine STEM
fields for students, eight STEM fields for graduates, and four broad STEM
fields for occupations.
For our data reliability assessment, we reviewed agency documentation on
the data sets and conducted electronic tests of the files. On the basis of
these reviews, we determined that the required data elements from NPSAS,
IPEDS and CPS were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. These data
sources, type, time span, and years analyzed are shown in table 18.
Table 18: Sources of Data, Data Obtained, Time Span of Data, and Years Analyzed
Time span
Department Agency Database Data obtained of data Years
analyzed
9 years Academic
Education NCES NPSAS years 1995-1996 and
College student enrollment 2003-
2004
9 years Academic
Education NCES IPEDS years 1994-1995 and
Graduation/degrees 2002-
2003
10 years Calendar
Labor BLS CPS Employment years 1994 through
2003
Sources: NPSAS, IPEDS, and
CPS data.
GAO-06-114 Federal
STEM Education
Page 48 Programs
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
NPSAS is a comprehensive nationwide study designed to determine how
students and their families pay for postsecondary education, and to
describe some demographic and other characteristics of those enrolled. The
study is based on a nationally representative sample of students in
postsecondary education institutions, including undergraduate, graduate,
and first-professional students. The NPSAS has been conducted every
several years since the 1986-1987 academic year. For this report, we
analyzed the results of the NPSAS survey for the 1995-1996 academic year
and the 2003-2004 academic year to compare student enrollment and
demographic characteristics between these two periods for the nine STEM
fields and non-STEM fields.
Because the NPSAS sample is a probability sample of students, the sample
is only one of a large number of samples that might have been drawn. Since
each sample could have provided different estimates, confidence in the
precision of the particular sample's results is expressed as a 95-percent
confidence interval (for example, plus or minus 4 percentage points). This
is the interval that would contain the actual population value for 95
percent of the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95
percent confident that each of the confidence intervals in this report
will include the true values in the study population. NPSAS estimates used
in this report and the upper and lower bounds of the 95 percent confidence
intervals for each estimate relied on in this report are presented in
appendix V.
IPEDS is a single, comprehensive system designed to encompass all
institutions and educational organizations whose primary purpose is to
provide postsecondary education. IPEDS is built around a series of
interrelated surveys to collect institution-level data in such areas as
enrollments, program completions, faculty, staff, and finances. For this
report, we analyzed the results of IPEDS data for the 1994-1995 academic
year and the 2002-2003 academic year to compare the numbers and
characteristics of graduates with degrees in eight STEM fields and
non-STEM fields.
To analyze changes in employees in STEM and non-STEM fields, we obtained
employment estimates from BLS's Current Population Survey March supplement
for 1995 through 2004 (calendar years 1994 through 2003). The CPS is a
monthly survey of households conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau (Census)
for BLS. The CPS provides a comprehensive body of information on the
employment and unemployment experience of the nation's population,
classified by age, sex, race, and a variety of other characteristics. A
more complete description of the survey, including
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
sample design, estimation, and other methodology can be found in the CPS
documentation prepared by Census and BLS.1
This March supplement (the Annual Demographic Supplement) is specifically
designed to estimate family characteristics, including income from all
sources and occupation and industry classification of the job held longest
during the previous year. It is conducted during the month of March each
year because it is believed that since March is the month before the
deadline for filing federal income tax returns, respondents would be more
likely to report income more accurately than at any other point during the
year.2
We used the CPS data to produce estimates on (1) four STEM fields, (2) men
and women, (3) two separate minority groups (Black or African American,
and Hispanic or Latino origin), and (4) median annual wages and salaries.
The measures of median annual wages and salaries could include bonuses,
but do not include noncash benefits such as health insurance or pensions.
CPS salary reported in March of each year was for the longest held
position actually worked the year before and reported by the worker
himself (or a knowledgeable member of the household). Tables 19 and 20
list the classification codes and occupations included in our analysis of
CPS data over a 10-year period (1994-2003). In developing the STEM groups,
we considered the occupational requirements and educational attainment of
individuals in certain occupations. We also excluded doctors and other
health care providers except registered nurses. During the period of
review, some codes and occupation titles were changed; we worked with BLS
officials to identify variations in codes and occupations and accounted
for these changes where appropriate and possible.
1See Technical Paper 63RV:Current Population Survey-Design and
Methodology, issued Mar. 2002. Electronic version available at
http://www.censusgov/prod/2002pubs/tp63rv.pdf.
2See Technical Paper 63RV, page 11-4.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Table 19: Classification codes and Occupations, 2002-2003
Mathematics/Computer
Science Technology Engineering Science
1600 - 1540 -
Agricultural and Drafters 1300 - Architects, 1000 - Computer
food except naval scientists
scientists and systems analysts
1610 - 1550 -
Biological Engineering 1310 - Surveyors,
scientists technicians, cartographers, 1010 - Computer
except and programmers
drafters photogrammetrists
1640 - 1560 -
Conservation Surveying and 1320 - Aerospace 1020 - Computer
mapping engineers software
scientists and technicians engineers
foresters
1650 - Medical 1900 -
scientists Agricultural 1330 - Agricultural 1040 - Computer
and food engineers support
science specialists
technicians
1700 - 1910 -
Astronomers and Biological 1340 - Biomedical 1060 - Database
technicians engineers
physicists administrators
1920 -
1710 - Chemical 1350 - Chemical 1100 - Network and
Atmospheric and technicians engineers
space scientists computer systems
administrators
1720 - Chemists 1930 -
and Geological and 1360 - Civil 1110 - Network systems
petroleum engineers and
materials technicians data communications
scientists
analysts
1740 - 1940 - Nuclear 1400 - Computer 1200 - Actuaries
Environmental technicians hardware
scientists and
geoscientists engineers
1760 - Physical 1960 - Other life, 1410 - Electrical 1210 -
scientists, all physical, and and electronic Mathematicians
other social science engineers
technicians
1800 - 1420 -
Economists 3300 - Clinical Environmental 1220 - Operations
laboratory engineers research
technologists and
technicians analysts
1810 - Market and 7010 - Computer, 1430 - 1230 -
survey automated teller Industrial Statisticians
engineers,
researchers and office machine including health
repairers and safety
1820 - 8760 - Medical, dental, 1440 - Marine 1240 -
Psychologists and engineers and Miscellaneous
ophthalmic laboratory naval architects mathematical
technicians science
occupations
1830 - Sociologists
1840 - Urban and regional planners
1860 - Miscellaneous social scientists and related workers
2010 - Social workers 3130 - Registered nurses 6010 - Agricultural
inspectors 1450 - Materials engineers 1460 - Mechanical engineers
1500 - Mining and geological engineers, including mining safety engineers
1510 - Nuclear engineers
1520 - Petroleum engineers
1530 - Engineers, all other
Source: GAO analysis of CPS occupation classifications.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Table 20: Classification codes and occupations, 1994-2001
Mathematics/Computer
Science Technology Engineering Science
069 - 203 - Clinical 043 -
Physicists and laboratory Architects 064 - Computer systems
astronomers technologists and analysts and scientists
technicians
073 - Chemists, 213 - Electrical 044 - Aerospace
except and electronic engineers 065 - Operations and
biochemists technicians systems researchers and
analysts
074 - Atmospheric and space 214 - Industrial engineering 045 -
Metallurgical and materials 066 - Actuaries scientists technicians
engineers
075 - Geologists 215 - Mechanical 046 - Mining 067 -
and engineering engineers Statisticians
geodesists technicians
076 - Physical 216 - Engineering 047 - Petroleum 068 -
scientists, technicians, engineers Mathematical
n.e.c. n.e.c. scientists,
n.e.c.
077 - Agricultural 217 - Drafting 048 - Chemical
and food occupations engineers 229 - Computer
scientists programmers
078 - Biological 218 - Surveying and 049 - Nuclear
and life mapping engineers
scientists technicians
223 - Biological 053 - Civil
079 - Forestry and technicians engineers
conservation
scientists
083 - Medical 224 - Chemical 054 -
scientists technicians Agricultural
engineers
095 - Registered 225 - Science 055 - Electrical
Nurses technicians, n.e.c. and electronic
engineers
166 - Economists 235 - Technicians, 056 - Industrial
n.e.c. engineers
525 - Data processing 057 - Mechanical
167 - Psychologists equipment engineers
repairers
168 - Sociologists 058 - Marine and naval architects
169 - Social scientists, n.e.c. 059 - Engineers, n.e.c.
173 - Urban planners 063 - Surveyors and mapping scientists
174 - Social workers
489 - Inspectors, agricultural products
Source: GAO analysis of CPS occupation classifications.
Note: For occupations not elsewhere classified (n.e.c.).
Because the CPS is a probability sample based on random selections, the
sample is only one of a large number of samples that might have been
drawn. Since each sample could have provided different estimates,
confidence in the precision of the particular sample's results is
expressed as a 95 percent confidence interval (e.g., plus or minus 4
percentage points). This is the interval that would contain the actual
population value
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
College and University Visits
for 95 percent of the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we
are 95 percent confident that each of the confidence intervals in this
report will include the true values in the study population. We use the
CPS general variance methodology to estimate this sampling error and
report it as confidence intervals. Percentage estimates we produce from
the CPS data have 95 percent confidence intervals of plus or minus 6
percentage points or less. Estimates other than percentages have 95
percent confidence intervals of no more than plus or minus 10 percent of
the estimate itself, unless otherwise noted. Consistent with the CPS
documentation guidelines, we do not produce estimates based on the March
supplement data for populations of less than 75,000.
GAO's internal control procedures provide reasonable assurance that our
data analyses are appropriate for the purposes we are using them. These
procedures include, but are not limited to, having skilled staff perform
the analyses, supervisory review by senior analysts, and
indexing/referencing (confirming that the analyses are supported by the
underlying audit documentation) activities.
We interviewed administrators and professors during site visits to eight
colleges and universities-the University of California at Los Angeles and
the University of Southern California in California; Clark Atlanta
University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and Spelman College in
Georgia; the University of Illinois; Purdue University in Indiana; and
Pennsylvania State University. These colleges and universities were
selected based on the following factors: large numbers of domestic and
international students in STEM fields, a mix of public and private
institutions, number of doctoral degrees conferred, and some geographic
diversity. We also selected three minority-serving colleges and
universities, one of which serves only women students. Clark Atlanta
University and Spelman College were selected, in part, because of their
partnerships with the College of Engineering at the Georgia Institute of
Technology. During these visits we asked the university officials about
factors that influenced whether people pursue a STEM education or
occupations and suggestions for addressing those factors that may
influence participation. For example, we asked university officials to
identify (1) issues related to the education pipeline; (2) steps taken by
their university to alleviate some of the conditions that may discourage
student participation in STEM areas; and (3) the federal role, if any, in
attracting and retaining domestic students in STEM fields. We also
obtained documents on programs they sponsored to help support STEM
students and graduates.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Reviews of Reports and Studies
We reviewed several articles, reports, and books related to trends in STEM
enrollment and factors that have an effect on people's decisions to pursue
STEM fields. For two studies, we evaluated the methodological soundness
using common social science and statistical practices. We examined each
study's methodology, including its limitations, data sources, analyses,
and conclusions.
o Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, by
Elaine Seymour and Nancy Hewitt.3 This study used interviews and focus
groups/group interviews at selected universities to identify selfreported
reasons for changing majors from science, mathematics, or engineering. The
study had four primary objectives: (1) to identify sources of qualitative
differences in educational experiences of science, mathematics, and
engineering students at higher educational institutions of different
types; (2) to identify differences in structure, culture, and pedagogy of
science, mathematics, and engineering departments and the impact on
student retention; (3) to compare and contrast causes of science,
mathematics, and engineering students' attrition by race/ethnicity and
gender; and (4) to estimate the relative importance of factors found to
contribute to science, mathematics, and engineering students' attrition.
The researchers selected seven universities to represent the types of
colleges and universities that supply most of the nations' scientists,
mathematicians, and engineers. The types of institutions were selected to
test whether there are differences in educational experiences, culture and
pedagogy, race/ethnicity and gender attrition, and reasons for attrition
by type of institution. Because the selection of students was not strictly
random and because there is no documentation that the data were weighted
to reflect the proportions of types of students selected, it is not
possible to determine confidence intervals. Thus it is not possible to say
which differences are statistically significant. The findings are now more
than a decade old and thus might not reflect current pedagogy and other
factors about the educational experience, students, or the socioeconomic
environment. It is important to note that the quantitative results of this
study are based on the views of one constituency or stakeholder-students.
Views of faculty, school administrators, graduates, professional
associations, and employers are not included.
3Seymour, Elaine, and Nancy M. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why
Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Westview Press, 1997, Boulder,
Colorado.
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
o NCES's Qualifications of the Public School Teacher Workforce:
Prevalence of Out-of-Field Teaching, 1987-1988 to 1999-2000 report. This
study is an analysis based upon the Schools and Staffing Survey for
1999-2000. The report was issued in 2004 by the Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. NCES's Schools and Staffing Survey
(SASS) is a representative sample of U.S. schools, districts, principals,
and teachers. The report focusing on teacher's qualifications uses data
from the district and teacher portion of SASS. The 1999-2000 SASS included
a nationally representative sample of public schools and universe of all
public charter schools with students in any of grades 1 through 12 and in
operation in school year 1999-2000. The 1999-2000 SASS administration also
included nationally representative samples of teachers in the selected
public and public charter schools who taught students in grades
kindergarten through 12 in school year 1999-2000. There were 51,811 public
school teachers in the sample and 42,086 completed public school teacher
interviews. In addition, there are 3,617 public charter school teachers in
the sample with 2,847 completed interviews. The overall weighted teacher
response rate was 76.7 percent for public school teachers and 71.8 percent
for public charter school teachers. NCES has strong standards for carrying
out educational surveys. The Office of Management and Budget vetted the
questionnaire and sample design. The Census Bureau carried out survey
quality control and data editing. One potential limitation is the amount
of time it takes the Census Bureau to get the data from field collection
to public release, but this is partly due to the thoroughness of the data
quality steps followed. The SASS survey meets GAO standards for use as
evidence in a report.
Interviews We interviewed officials from 13 federal agencies with STEM
education programs to obtain information about the STEM programs and their
views on related topics, including factors that influence students'
decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and the extent of
coordination among the federal agencies. We also interviewed officials
from the National Science and Technology Council to discuss coordination
efforts. In addition, we interviewed representatives and policy experts
from various organizations. These organizations were the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, the Commission on
Professionals in Science and Technology, the Council of Graduate Schools,
NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the National Academies, and
the Council on Competitiveness.
We also conducted interviews via e-mail with 31 students. We asked
officials from the eight universities visited to identify students to
complete
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
our e-mail interviews, and students who completed the interviews attended
five of the colleges we visited. Of the 31 students: 16 attended Purdue
University, 6 attended the University of Southern California, 6 attended
Spelman College, 2 attended the University of California Los Angeles, and
1 attended the Georgia Institute of Technology. In addition, 19 students
were undergraduates and 12 were graduate students; 19 students identified
themselves as women and 12 students identified themselves as men. Of the
19 undergraduate students, 9 said that they plan to pursue graduate work
in a STEM field.
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Based on surveys submitted by officials representing the 13 civilian
federal agencies, table 21 contains a list of the 207 science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs funded in fiscal
year 2004.
Table 21: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded in FY 2004
Fiscal year Program number Program name 04 funding
Department of Agriculture
1. 1890 Institution Teaching and Research Capacity Building Grants Program
$11.4 million
2. Higher Education Challenge Grants Program $4.6 million
3. Hispanic-Serving Institutions Education Grants Program $4.6 million
4. Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions
Education Grants $3 million
Program
5. Food and Agricultural Sciences National Needs Graduate and
Postdoctoral Fellowships $2.9 million
Grants Program
6. Tribal Colleges Endowment Program $1.9 million
7. Tribal Colleges Education Equity Grants Program $1.7 million
8. Tribal Colleges Research Grant Program $1.1 million
9. Higher Education Multicultural Scholars Program $986,000
10. International Science and Education Competitive Grants Program
$859,000
11. Secondary and Two-Year Postsecondary Agricultural Education Challenge
Grants $839,000
Program
12. Agriculture in the Classroom $623,000
13. Career Intern Program $272,000
14. Veterinary Medical Doctoral Program $140,000
15. 1890 National Scholars Program $16,000
16. Hispanic Scholars Program $4,000
Department of Commerce
17. Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions
$7.4 million
18. National Marine Sanctuaries Education Program $4.4 million
19. National Sea Grant College Program $4 million
20. Chesapeake Bay Watershed Education and Training Program $2.5 million
21. Coral Reef Conservation Program $1.8 million
22. Exploration, Education and Outreach $1.3 million
23. National Estuarine Research Reserve Graduate Research Fellowship
Program $1 million
24. Bay Watershed Education and Training Hawaii Program $500,000
25. Monterey Bay Watershed Education and Training Program $500,000
26. Dr. Nancy Foster Scholarship Program $494,000
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year Program number Program name 04 funding
27. EstuaryLive $115,000
28. Teacher at Sea Program $95,000
29. High School-High Tech $11,000
Department of Education
30. Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program $149 million
31. Upward Bound Math and Science Program $32.8 million
32. Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need $30.6 million
33. Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program $8.9 million
Department of Energy
34. Science Undergraduate Laboratory Internship $2.5 million
35. Computational Science Graduate Fellowship $2 million
36. Global Change Education Program $1.4 million
37. Laboratory Science Teacher Professional Development $1 million
38. National Science Bowl $702,000
39. Community College Institute of Science and Technology $605,000
40. Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellowship $600,000
41. QuarkNet $575,000
42. Fusion Energy Sciences Fellowship Program $555,000
43. Pre-Service Teacher Fellowships $510,000
44. National Undergraduate Fellowship Program in Plasma Physics and
Fusion Energy $300,000
Sciences
45. Fusion Energy Postdoctoral Research Program $243,000
46. Faculty and Student Teams $215,000
47. Advancing Precollege Science and Mathematics Education $209,000
48. Pan American Advanced Studies Institute $200,000
49. Trenton Community Partnership $200,000
50. Fusion/Plasma Education $125,000
51. National Middle School Science Bowl $100,000
52. Research Project on the Recruitment, Retention, and Promotion of
Women in the $100,000
Chemical Sciences
53. Used Energy Related Laboratory Equipment $80,000
54. Plasma Physics Summer Institute for High School Physics Teachers
$78,000
55. Pre-Service Teacher Program $45,000
56. Wonders of Physics Traveling Show $45,000
57. Hampton University Graduate Studies $40,000
58. Contemporary Physics Education Project $23,000
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year Program number Program name 04 funding
59. Cooperative Education Program $17,000
Environmental Protection Agency
60. Science to Achieve Results Research Grants Program $93.3 million
61. Science to Achieve Results Graduate Fellowship Program $10 million
62. Post-Doctoral Fellows Environmental Research Growth Opportunities $7.4
million
63. Intern Program $3 million
64. Environmental Science and Engineering Fellows Program $2.5 million
65. Greater Research Opportunities Graduate Fellowship Program $1.5
million
66. Environmental Risk & Impact in Communities of Color and Economically
Disadvantaged $824,000
Communities
67. Research Internship for Students in Ecology $698,000
68. National Network for Environmental Management Studies Fellowship
Program $589,000
69. Cooperative Agreements for Training Cooperative Partnerships $352,000
70. University of Cincinnati/EPA Research Training Grant $300,000
71. P3 Award: National Student Design Competition for Sustainability
$150,000
72. Environmental Protection Agency and the Hispanic Association of
Colleges and $121,000
Universities Cooperative Agreement
73. Environmental Science Program $100,000
74. Environmental Career Organization's Internship Program $89,000
75. EPA-Cincinnati Research Apprenticeship Program $75,000
76. Environmental Protection Internship Program Summer Training Initiative
$72,000
77. Tribal Lands Environmental Science Scholarship Program $60,000
78. Internship Program for University of Arizona Engineering Students
$50,000
79. Teacher Professional Development Workshop for Teachers Grade 6-12
$18,000
80. Saturday Academy, Apprenticeships in Science and Engineering Program
$6,000
Department of Health and Human Services/Health Resources and Services
Administration
81. Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students Program $45.5 million
82. Nursing Workforce Diversity $16 million
83. Faculty Loan Repayment Program $1.1 million
Department of Health and Human Services/Indian Health Service
84. Indian Health Professions Scholarship $8.1 million
85. Health Professions Scholarship Program for Indians $3.7 million
Department of Health and Human Services/National Institutes of Health
86. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Institutional
Research Training $546.9 million
Grants
87. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for Individual
Postdoctoral $72.6 million
Fellows
88. Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research
$70 million
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year Program number Program name 04 funding
89. Postdoctoral Visiting Fellow Program $64.8 million
90. Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program $40.6 million
91. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for Individual
Predoctoral $33.8 million
Fellows, Predoctoral Minority Students, and Predoctoral Students with
Disabilities
92. Minority Access to Research Careers Program $30.7 million
93. Postdoctoral Intramural Research Training Award Program $30.2 million
94. Science Education Partnership Award $16 million
95. Pediatric Research Loan Repayment Program $15.9 million
96. Post-baccalaureate Intramural Research Training Award Program $9.1
million
97. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award Short-Term
Institutional Research $9 million
Training Grants
98. Health Disparities Research Loan Repayment Program $8.7 million
99. Graduate Program Partnerships $7.4 million
100. Student Intramural Research Training Award Program $6.3 million
101. Career Opportunities in Research Education and Training $5 million
Honors Undergraduate
Research Training Grant
102. General Research Loan Repayment Program $4.9 million
103. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for $4.7 million
Individual M.D./Ph.D.
Predoctoral Fellows
104. Science Education Drug Abuse Partnership Award $3.1 million
105. Pharmacology Research Associate Training Program $2.7 million
106. Technical Intramural Research Training Award $1.9 million
107. Fellowships in Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics $1.8 million
108. Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program for Individuals $1.7 million
from Disadvantaged
Backgrounds
109. Contraception and Infertility Research Loan Repayment $1 million
Program
110. Medical Infomatics Training Program $853,000
111. Undergraduate Scholarship Program for Individuals from $838,000
Disadvantaged Backgrounds
112. Curriculum Supplement Series $788,000
113. National Science Foundation and the National Institute
of Biomedical Imaging and $782,000
Bioengineering
114. Summer Institute for Training in Biostatistics $694,000
115. Summer Institute on Design and Conduct of Randomized
Clinical Trials Involving $622,000
Behavioral Interventions
116. Clinical Research Loan Repayment Program for Individuals
from Disadvantaged $551,000
Background
117. Clinical Research Training Program $407,000
118. NIH Academy $385,000
119. Health Communications Internship Program $340,000
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year
Program number Program name 04 funding
120. NIH/National Institute of Standards and $338,000
Technology Joint Postdoctoral Program
121. Summer Genetics Institute $323,000
122. AIDS Research Loan Repayment Program $271,000
123. Intramural NIAID Research Opportunities $271,000
124. Cancer Research Interns in Residence $250,000
125. Comparative Molecular Pathology Research $199,000
Training Program
126. Office of Research on Women's Health-funded
Programs with the Office of Intramural $179,000
Research
127. Summer Institute for Social Work Research $144,000
128. Office of Research on Women's Health-funded
Programs with the Office of Intramural $119,000
Training and Education
129. CCR/JHU Master of Science in Biotechnology $111,000
Concentration in Molecular Targets and
Drug Discovery Technologies
130. Introduction to Cancer Research Careers $96,000
131. Fellows Award for Research Excellence Program $61,000
132. Office of Research on Women's Health-funded
Programs Supplements to Promote $60,000
Reentry into Biomedical and Behavioral Research
Careers
133. Translational Research in Clinical Oncology $28,000
134. National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences Office of Fellows' Career $20,000
Development
135. Mobilizing for Action to Address the Unequal $10,000
Burden of Cancer: NIH Research and
Training Opportunities
136. Sallie Rosen Kaplan Fellowship for Women in
Cancer Research $5,000
Department of Homeland Security
137. Scholars and Fellows Program $4.7 million
Department of the Interior
138. Cooperative Research Units Program $15.3 million
139. Water Resources Research Act Program $6.4 million
140. U.S. Geological Survey Mendenhall Postdoctoral Research Fellowship
Program $3.5 million
141. Student Educational Employment Program $1.8 million
142. EDMAP Component of the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program
$490,000
143. Student Career Experience Program $177,000
144. Cooperative Development Energy Program $60,000
145. Diversity Employment Program $30,000
146. Cooperative Agreement with Langston University $15,000
147. Mathematics, Science, and Engineering Academy $15,000
148. Shorebird Sister Schools Program $15,000
149. Build a Bridge Contest $14,000
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year Program number Program name 04 funding
150. VIVA Technology $8,000
National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Science Foundation
151. Minority University Research Education Program $106.6 million
152. Higher Education $77.4 million
153. Elementary and Secondary Education $31.3 million
154. E-Education $9.7 million
155. Informal Education $5.5 million
156. Math and Science Partnership Program $138.7 million
157. Graduate Research Fellowship Program $96 million
158. Integrative Graduate Education and Research $67.7 million
Traineeship Program
159. Teacher Professional Continuum $61.5 million
160. Research Experiences for Undergraduates $51.7 million
161. Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education $49.8 million
162. Advanced Technological Education $45.9 million
163. Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement $40.7 million
164. Research on Learning and Education $39.4 million
165. Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics $33.9 million
Scholarships
166. Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation $33.3 million
167. Centers for Learning and Teaching $30.8 million
168. Instructional Materials Development $29.3 million
169. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics $25 million
Talent Expansion Program
170. Historically Black Colleges and Universities $23.8 million
Undergraduate Program
171. Interagency Education Research Initiative $23.6 million
172. Information Technology Experiences for Students and $20.9 million
Teachers
173. Enhancing the Mathematical Sciences Workforce in the $20.6 million
21st Century
174. Centers of Research Excellence in Science and $19.8 million
Technology
175. ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement $19.4 million
of Women in Academic
Science and Engineering Careers
176. Federal Cyber Service: Scholarship for Service $15.8 million
177. Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate $15.3 million
178. Research on Gender in Science and Engineering $10 million
179. Tribal Colleges and Universities Program $10 million
180. Model Institutions for Excellence $9.7 million
181. Grants for the Department-Level Reform of $8.2 million
Undergraduate Engineering Education
182. Robert Noyce Scholarship Program $8 million
183. Research Experiences for Teachers $5.8 million
Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
Fiscal year
Program number Program name 04 funding
184. Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education $4.8 million
185. Research in Disabilities Education $4.6 million
186. Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the $4 million
Geosciences
187. Mathematical Sciences Postdoctoral Research $3.7 million
Fellowships
188. Minority Postdoctoral Research Fellowships and $3.2 million
Supporting Activities
189. Partnerships for Research and Education in $3 million
Materials
190. Undergraduate Research Centers $3 million
191. Centers for Ocean Science Education Excellence $2.8 million
192. Undergraduate Mentoring in Environmental $2.2 million
Biology
193. Director's Award for Distinguished Teaching $1.8 million
Scholars
194. Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctoral $1.6 million
Fellowship Program
195. Geoscience Education $1.5 million
196. Internships in Public Science Education $1.2 million
197. Discovery Corps Fellowship Program $1.1 million
198. East Asia & Pacific Summer Institutes for U.S. $1 million
Graduate Students
199. Pan-American Advanced Studies Institutes $800,000
200. Distinguished International Postdoctoral
Research Fellowships $788,000
201. Postdoctoral Fellowships in Polar Regions Research $667,000
202. Arctic Research and Education $300,000
203. Developing Global Scientists and Engineers $172,000
Department of Transportation
204. University Transportation Centers Program $32.5 million
205. Dwight David Eisenhower Transportation Fellowship Program $2 million
206. Summer Transportation Institute $2 million
207. Summer Transportation Internship Program for Diverse Groups $925,000
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or More
The federal civilian agencies reported that the following science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs were
funded with at least $10 million in either fiscal year 2004 or 2005.
However, programs that received $10 million or more in fiscal year 2004
but were unfunded for fiscal year 2005 were excluded from table 22. Agency
officials also provided the program descriptions in table 22.
Table 22: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or More during
Fiscal Year 2004 or Fiscal Year 2005
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Department of
Agriculture
Is intended to strengthen
1890 Institution teaching and research programs in 1990 $11.4 $12.5
Teaching and the
Research Capacity food and agricultural sciences by
Building building the institutional
capacities
of the 1890 Land-Grant
Institutions and Tuskegee
Grants Program University and
West Virginia State University through cooperative linkages with federal
and nonfederal entities. The program supports projects that strengthen
teaching programs in the food and agricultural sciences in the targeted
educational need areas of curriculum design and materials development,
faculty preparation and enhancement of teaching, student experiential
learning, and student recruitment and retention.
Department of Education
Mathematics and Science Is intended to increase the academic achievement
of students in 2002 $149 $180
Partnerships Program mathematics and science by enhancing the content
knowledge and teaching skills of classroom teachers. Partnerships are
between high-need school districts and the science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics faculties of institutions of higher
education.
Upward Bound Math and Designed to prepare low-income, first-generation
college students 1990 $32.8 $32.8 Science Program for postsecondary
education programs that lead to careers in the fields of math and science.
Graduate Assistance in Areas Provides fellowships in academic areas of
national need to assist 1988 $30.6 $30.4 of National Need graduate
students with excellent academic records who
demonstrate financial need and plan to pursue the highest degree available
in their courses of study.
Environmental Protection Agency
Science to Achieve Results Funds research grants in numerous environmental
science and
1995 $93.3 $80.1 Research Grants Program
engineering disciplines. The program engages the nation's best scientists
and engineers in targeted research. The grant program is currently focused
on the health effects of particulate matter, drinking water, water
quality, global change, ecosystem assessment and restoration, human health
risk assessment, endocrine disrupting chemicals, pollution prevention and
new technologies, children's health, and socio-economic research.
Science to Achieve Results The purpose of this fellowship program is to
encourage promising 1995 $10 $10 Graduate Fellowship Program
students to obtain advanced degrees and pursue careers in environmentally
related fields.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Department of Health and Human Services/Health Resources and Services
Administration
Scholarships for Funds are awarded to accredited 1991 $45.5 Not
schools of allopathic medicine,
Disadvantaged Students osteopathic medicine, dentistry, avail.
optometry, pharmacy, podiatric
medicine, veterinary medicine,
Program nursing, public health,
chiropractic, or
allied health, and schools
offering graduate programs in
behavioral
and mental health practice.
Priority is given to schools
based on the
proportion of graduating students
going into primary care, the
proportion of underrepresented
minority students enrolled, and
graduates working in medically
underserved communities. Schools
select qualified students and
provide scholarships that cannot
exceed tuition and reasonable
educational and living expenses.
Nursing Workforce To increase nursing education opportunities 1989 $16 $16
Diversity for individuals who are
from disadvantaged backgrounds (including
racial and ethnic
minorities underrepresented among
registered nurses) by providing
student stipends, pre-entry preparation,
and retention activities.
Department of Health and Human Services/National Institutes of Health
Ruth L. Kirschstein Is designed to develop and
National enhance research training 1975 $546.9 Not
opportunities
for individuals in biomedical,
Research Service Award behavioral, and clinical avail.
research by
supporting training programs at
Institutional Research institutions of higher
education.
These institutional training
Training Grants grants allow the director of
the program
to select the trainees and to
develop a curriculum of study
and
research experiences necessary
to provide high-quality
research
training. The grant helps
offset the cost of stipends and
tuition for
the appointed trainees.
Graduate students, postdoctoral
trainees,
and short-term research
training for health
professional students can
be supported by this grant.
Ruth L. Kirschstein To support the advanced training 1975 $72.6 Not
National of individual students who have
Research Service Awards recently received doctoral avail.
for degrees. This phase of research
education and training is
Individual Postdoctoral performed under the direct
supervision of a
sponsor who is an active
Fellows investigator in the area of the
proposed
research. The training is
designed to enhance the fellow's
understanding of the
health-related sciences and
extend his/her
potential to become a productive
scientist who can perform
research
in biomedical, behavioral, or
clinical fields.
Research Supplements to To improve the diversity of the 1989 $70 $70
research workforce by recruiting and
Promote Diversity in supporting students, postdoctoral
Health- fellows, and eligible investigators
Related Research from groups that have been shown to
be underrepresented, such as
individuals from underrepresented
racial and ethnic groups,
individuals with disabilities, and
individuals from disadvantaged
backgrounds.
Postdoctoral Visiting To provide advanced practical 1950 $64.8 $70.7
Fellow biomedical research experience to
individuals who are foreign
Program nationals and are 1 to 5 years
beyond
obtaining their Ph.D. or
professional doctorate (e.g., M.D.,
DDS,
etc.).
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Clinical Research To attract health professionals to 2002 $40.6 $42.6
Loan careers in clinical research.
Repayment Program Clinical research is defined as
"patient-oriented clinical research
conducted with human subjects, or
research on the causes and
consequences of disease in human
populations involving material of
human origin (such as tissue specimens
and cognitive phenomena)
for which an investigator or colleague
directly interacts with human
subjects in an outpatient or inpatient
setting to clarify a problem in
human physiology, pathophysiology or
disease, or epidemiologic or
behavioral studies, outcomes research
or health services research,
or developing new technologies,
therapeutic interventions, or clinical
trials."
Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for Individual
Predoctoral Fellows, Predoctoral Minority Students, and Predoctoral
Students with Disabilities Provides predoctoral fellowships to students
who are candidates for doctoral degrees and are performing dissertation
research and training under the supervision of a mentor who is an active
and established investigator in the area of the proposed research. The
applicant and mentor must provide evidence of potential for a productive
research career based upon the quality of previous research training,
academic record, and training program. The applicant and mentor must
propose a research project that will enhance the student's ability to
understand and perform scientific research. The training program should be
carried out in a research environment that includes appropriate resources
and is demonstrably committed to the student's training.
1975 $33.8 Not avail.
Minority Access to Offers special research training 1972 $30.7 $30.7
Research support to 4-year colleges,
Careers Program universities, and health professional
schools with substantial
enrollments of minorities such as
African Americans, Hispanic
Americans, Native Americans (including
Alaska Natives), and
natives of U.S. Pacific Islands.
Individual fellowships are also
provided for graduate students and
faculty.
Postdoctoral Intramural To provide advanced practical biomedical research
experience to 1986 $30.2 $33.3
Research Training Award individuals who are 1 to 5 years beyond obtaining
their Ph.D. or
Program professional doctorate (e.g., M.D., DDS, etc.).
Science Education Provides funds for the development, 1992 $16 $16
implementation, and evaluation
Partnership Award of innovative kindergarten through 12th
grade (K-12) science
education programs, teaching materials, and
science
center/museum programs. This program
supports partnerships
linking biomedical, clinical researchers,
and behavioral scientists
with K-12 teachers and schools, museum and
science educators,
media experts, and other interested
organizations.
Pediatric Research A program to attract health 2002 $15.9 $16
Loan professionals to careers in pediatric
Repayment Program research. Qualified pediatric research
is defined as "research
directly related to diseases, disorders,
and other conditions in
children."
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005 Department of Homeland Security
Department of the Interior Department of Labor National Aeronautics and Space
Administration
To provide (1) recent college
Post-baccalaureate graduates (graduated no more 1996 $9.1 $12.3
than 2
years prior to activation of
Intramural Research Training traineeship), an introduction
early in their
careers to biomedical
Award Program research fields; encourage
their pursuit of
professional careers in
biomedical research; and
allow additional
time to pursue successful
application to either
graduate or medical
school programs or (2)
students who have been
accepted into
graduate, other doctoral, or
medical degree programs, and
who
have written permission from
their school to delay
entrance for up to
1 year.
University Programs Provides scholarships for 2003 $4.7 $10.7
undergraduate and fellowships for
graduate students pursuing degrees in
mission-relevant fields and
postdoctoral fellowships for their
contributions to Department of
Homeland Security research projects.
Students receive professional
mentoring and complete a summer
internship to connect academic
interests with homeland security
initiatives. Postdoctoral scholars
are also mentored by DHS scientists.
Cooperative Research The program links graduate science 1936 $15.3 $15
Units training with the research needs
Program of state and federal agencies, and
provides students with one-on-
one mentoring by federal research
scientists working on both
applied and basic research needs of
interest to the program.
Program cooperators and partners
provide graduate training
opportunities and support.
To build the capacity of
Community community colleges to train in 2005 $0 $250
high-growth,
College/Community Based high-demand industries and to
actually train workers in those
Job Training Grant Initiative industries through partnerships
that also include workforce
investment boards and
employers.
Minority University Research Education Program
To expand and advance NASA's scientific and technological base through
collaborative efforts with Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCU) and other minority universities (OMU), including Hispanic-serving
institutions and Tribal colleges and universities. This program also
provides K-12 awards to build and support successful pathways for students
to progress to the next level of mathematics and science, through a
college preparatory curriculum, and enrollment in college.
Higher-education awards are also given that seek to improve the rate at
which underrepresented minorities are awarded degrees in STEM disciplines
through increased research training and exposure to cutting-edge
technologies that better prepare them to enter STEM graduate programs, the
NASA workforce pipeline, and employment in NASA-related industries.
2002 $106.6 $73.6
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005 National Science Foundation
Higher Education The Higher Education Program focuses on 2002 $77.4 $62.4
supporting institutions of
higher education in strengthening their
research capabilities and
providing opportunities that attract and
prepare increasing numbers
of students for NASA-related careers.
The research conducted by
the institutions will contribute to the
research needs of NASA's
Mission Directorates. The student
projects serve as a major link in
the student pipeline for addressing
NASA's human capital strategies
and the President's management agenda by
helping to build,
sustain, and effectively deploy the
skilled, knowledgeable, diverse,
and high-performing workforce needed to
meet the current and
emerging needs of government and its
citizens.
Elementary and To increase the rigor of STEM experiences 2002 $31.3 $23.2
Secondary provided to K-12
Education students through workshops, summer
internships, and classroom
activities; provide high-quality
professional development to teachers
in STEM through NASA programs; develop
technological avenues
through the NASA Web site that will allow
families to have common
experiences with learning about space
exploration; encourage
inquiry teaching in K-12 classrooms;
improve the content and focus
of grade level/science team meetings in
NASA Explorer Schools;
and share the knowledge gained through the
Educator Astronaut
Program with teachers, students, and
families.
Informal Education The principal purpose of the informal 2002 $5.5 $10.2
education program is to
support projects designed to increase
public interest in,
understanding of, and engagement in
STEM activities. The goal of
all informal education programs is an
informed citizenry that has
access to the ideas of science and
engineering and understands its
role in enhancing the quality of life
and the health, prosperity,
welfare, and security of the nation.
Informal learning is self-directed,
voluntary, and motivated mainly by
intrinsic interests, curiosity,
exploration, and social interaction.
Math and Science The MSP is a major research and 2002 $138.7 $79.4
development effort that supports
Partnership innovative partnerships to improve
(MSP)Program kindergarten through grade 12
student achievement in mathematics and
science. MSP projects are
expected to both raise the achievement
levels of all students and
significantly reduce achievement gaps
in the mathematics and
science performance of diverse student
populations. Successful
projects serve as models that can be
widely replicated in
educational practice to improve the
mathematics and science
achievement of all the nation's
students.
Graduate Research The purpose of the GRFP is to ensure the 1952 $96 $96.6
vitality of the scientific
Fellowship Program and technological workforce in the
(GRFP) United States and to reinforce its
diversity. The program recognizes and
supports outstanding
graduate students in the relevant
science and engineering
disciplines who are pursuing
research-based master's and doctoral
degrees. NSF fellows are expected to
become knowledge experts
who can contribute significantly to
research, teaching, and
innovations in science and engineering.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
This program provides support to
Integrative Graduate universities for student positions 1998 $67.7 $69
in
Education and Research interdisciplinary areas of science
and engineering. Traineeships
Traineeship Program focus on multidisciplinary and
intersectoral research opportunities
and prepare future faculty in
effective teaching methods,
applications of advanced educational
technologies, and student
mentoring techniques.
Teacher Professional The program addresses critical 2004 $61.5 $60.2
issues and needs regarding the
Continuum recruitment, preparation, induction,
retention, and lifelong
development of kindergarten through
grade 12 STEM teachers. Its
goals are to improve the quality and
coherence of teacher learning
experiences across the continuum
through research that informs
teaching practice and the
development of innovative resources
for
the professional development of
kindergarten through grade 12
STEM teachers.
Research Experiences This program supports active 1987 $51.7 $51.1
for participation by undergraduate
Undergraduates students in research projects in any
of the areas of research funded
by the National Science Foundation.
The program seeks to involve
students in meaningful ways in all
kinds of research-whether
disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or
educational in focus-linked to the
efforts of individual investigators,
research groups, centers, and
national facilities. Particular
emphasis is given to the recruitment
of
women, minorities, and persons with
disabilities.
Graduate Teaching This program supports fellowships and 1999 $49.8 $49.9
Fellows in associated training that
K-12 Education enable graduate students in
NSF-supported STEM disciplines to
acquire additional skills that will
broadly prepare them for
professional and scientific careers.
Through interactions with
teachers, graduate students can improve
communication and
teaching skills while enriching STEM
instruction in kindergarten
through grade 12 schools. This program
also provides institutions of
higher education with an opportunity to
make a permanent change
in their graduate programs by including
partnerships with schools in
a manner that will mutually benefit
faculties and students.
Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
With an emphasis on 2-year colleges, the ATE program focuses on the
education of technicians for the high-technology fields that drive our
nation's economy. The program involves partnerships between academic
institutions and employers to promote improvement in the education of
science and engineering technicians at the undergraduate and secondary
school levels. The ATE program supports curriculum development,
professional development of college faculty and secondary school teachers,
career pathways to 2-year colleges from secondary schools and from 2-year
colleges to 4-year institutions, and other activities. The program also
invites proposals focusing on applied research relating to technician
education.
1994 $45.9 $45.1
Course, Curriculum, and This program emphasizes projects 1999 $40.7 $40.6
that build on prior work and
Laboratory Improvement contribute to the knowledge base
of undergraduate STEM education
research and practice. In
addition, projects should
contribute to
building a community of scholars
who work in related areas of
undergraduate education.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Research on Learning The program seeks to capitalize on 2000 $39.4 $38.2
and important developments across
Education a wide range of fields related to
human learning and to STEM
education. It supports research
across a continuum that includes (1)
the biological basis of human
learning; (2) behavioral, cognitive,
affective, and social aspects of
STEM learning; (3) STEM learning in
formal and informal educational
settings; (4) STEM policy research;
and (5) the diffusion of STEM
innovations.
Computer Science, This program supports scholarships 1999 $33.9 $75
for academically talented,
Engineering, and financially needy students,
enabling them to enter the high-
Mathematics Scholarships technology workforce following
completion of an associate,
baccalaureate, or graduate-level
degree in computer science,
computer technology, engineering,
engineering technology, or
mathematics. Academic institutions
apply for awards to support
scholarship activities and are
responsible for selecting
scholarship
recipients, reporting demographic
information about student
scholars, and managing the project
at the institution.
Louis Stokes Alliances The program is aimed at increasing 1991 $33.3 $35
for the quality and quantity of
Minority Participation students successfully completing
STEM baccalaureate degree
programs and increasing the number
of students interested in,
academically qualified for, and
matriculated into programs of
graduate study. It also supports
sustained and comprehensive
approaches that facilitate
achievement of the long-term goal
of
increasing the number of students
who earn doctorates in STEM,
particularly those from populations
underrepresented in STEM
fields.
Centers for Learning The program focuses on the advanced 2000 $30.8 $28.4
and preparation of STEM
educators, as well as the
Teaching establishment of meaningful
partnerships
among education stakeholders,
especially Ph.D.-granting
institutions, school systems, and
informal education performers. Its
goals are to renew and diversify the
cadre of leaders in STEM
education; to increase the number of
kindergarten through
undergraduate educators capable of
delivering high-quality STEM
instruction and assessment; and to
conduct research into STEM
education issues of national import,
such as the nature of learning,
teaching strategies, and reform
policies and outcomes.
Instructional Materials This program contains three 1983 $29.3 $28.5
components. It supports (1) the
Development creation and substantial revision
of comprehensive curricula and
supplemental materials that are
research-based, enhance
classroom instruction, and
reflect standards for science,
mathematics, and technology
education developed by
professional
organizations; (2) the creation
of tools for assessing student
learning
that are tied to nationally
developed standards and reflect
the most
current thinking on how students
learn mathematics and science;
and (3) research for development
of this program and projects.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Science, Technology, The program seeks to increase the 2002 $25 $25.3
number of students (U.S.
Engineering, and citizens or permanent residents)
receiving associate or
Mathematics Talent baccalaureate degrees in established
or emerging fields within
Expansion Program STEM. Type 1 proposals that provide
for full implementation efforts
at academic institutions are
solicited. Type 2 proposals that
support
educational research projects on
associate or baccalaureate degree
attainment in STEM are also solicited.
Historically Black This program provides awards to 1998 $23.8 $25.2
Colleges enhance the quality of STEM
and Universities (HBCU) instructional and outreach
programs at HBCUs as a means to
Undergraduate Program broaden participation in the
nation's STEM workforce. Project
strategies include curriculum
enhancement, faculty
professional
development, undergraduate
research, academic enrichment,
infusion of technology to
enhance STEM instruction,
collaborations
with research institutions and
industry, and other activities
that meet
institutional needs.
Interagency Education This is a collaborative effort with 1999 $23.6 $13.8
the U.S. Department of Education.
Research Initiative The goal is to support scientific
research that investigates the
effectiveness of educational
interventions in reading,
mathematics,
and the sciences as they are
implemented in varied school
settings
with diverse student populations.
The program is designed to
Information Technology increase the opportunities for 2003 $20.9 $25
students
Experiences for Students and teachers to learn about,
and experience, and use information
Teachers technologies within the context of
STEM, including information
technology courses. It is in
direct response to the concern
about
shortages of technology workers in
the United States. It has two
components: (1) youth-based
projects with strong emphasis on
career and educational paths and
(2) comprehensive projects for
students and teachers.
Enhancing the The long-range goal of this program 2004 $20.6 $20.7
Mathematical is to increase the number of
Sciences Workforce in U.S. citizens, nationals, and
the permanent residents who are well
21st Century prepared in the mathematical
sciences and who pursue careers in
the mathematical sciences and in
other NSF-supported disciplines.
This program makes resources
Centers of Research available to significantly enhance 1987 $19.8 $15.9
the
Excellence in Science research capabilities of
and minority-serving institutions
through the
Technology establishment of centers that
effectively integrate education and
research. It promotes the
development of new knowledge,
enhancements of the research
productivity of individual faculty,
and
an expanded diverse student
presence in STEM disciplines.
ADVANCE: Increasing the The program goal is to increase 2001 $19.4 $19.8
the representation and
Participation and advancement of women in academic
science and engineering
Advancement of Women in careers, thereby contributing to
the development of a more diverse
science and engineering
Academic Science and workforce. Members of
underrepresented
Engineering Careers minority groups and individuals
with disabilities are especially
encouraged to apply.
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005
Federal Cyber Service: Scholarship for Service
This program seeks to increase the number of qualified students entering
the fields of information assurance and computer security and to increase
the capacity of the United States' higher education enterprise to continue
to produce professionals in these fields to meet the needs of our
increasingly technological society. The program has two tracks: provides
funds to colleges and universities to (1) award scholarships to students
to pursue academic programs in the information assurance and computer
security fields for the final 2 years of undergraduate study, or for 2
years of master's-level study, or for the final 2 years of Ph.D.-level
study, and (2) improve the quality and increase the production of
information assurance and computer security professionals.
2001 $15.8 $14.1
This program is intended to
Alliances for Graduate increase significantly the number 1998 $15.3 $14.8
of
domestic students receiving
Education and the doctoral degrees in STEM, with
special
Professoriate emphasis on those population
groups underrepresented in these
fields. The program is interested
in increasing the number of
minorities who will enter the
professoriate in these
disciplines.
Specific objectives are to develop
(1) and implement innovative
models for recruiting, mentoring,
and retaining minority students in
STEM doctoral programs, and (2)
effective strategies for
identifying
and supporting underrepresented
minorities who want to pursue
academic careers.
Research on Gender in The program seeks to broaden the 1993 $10 $9.8
participation of girls and women
Science and Engineering in all fields of STEM education by
supporting research,
dissemination of research, and
extension services in education that
will lead to a larger and more
diverse domestic science and
engineering workforce. Typical
projects will contribute to the
knowledge base addressing
gender-related differences in
learning
and in the educational experiences
that affect student interest,
performance, and choice of careers,
and how pedagogical
approaches and teaching styles,
curriculum, student services, and
institutional culture contribute to
causing or closing gender gaps that
persist in certain fields.
Tribal Colleges and Universities Program This program provides awards to
enhance the quality of STEM instructional and outreach programs, with
special attention to the use of information technologies at Tribal
colleges and universities, Alaskan Native-serving institutions, and Native
Hawaiian-serving institutions. Support is available for the implementation
of comprehensive institutional approaches to strengthen STEM teaching and
learning in ways that improve access to, retention within, and graduation
from STEM programs, particularly those that have a strong technological
foundation. Through this program, assistance is provided to eligible
institutions in their efforts to bridge the digital divide and prepare
students for careers in information technology, science, mathematics, and
engineering fields.
2001 $10 $9.8
Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or
More
Funding (in millions of dollars)a
Program Description First year 2004 2005 Department of Transportation
University Transportation Centers Program (UTC) The UTC program's mission
is to advance U.S. technology and expertise in the many disciplines
comprising transportation through the mechanisms of education, research,
and technology transfer at university-based centers of excellence. The UTC
program's goals include (1) developing a multidisciplinary program of
coursework and experiential learning that reinforces the transportation
theme of the center; (2) increasing the numbers of students, faculty, and
staff who are attracted to and substantially involved in the
undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs of the center; and (3)
having students, faculty, and staff who reflect the growing diversity of
the U.S. workforce and are substantially involved in the undergraduate,
graduate, and professional programs of the center.
1998 $32.5 $32.5
Source: GAO survey responses from 13 federal agencies.
aThe dollar amounts for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 contain actual and
estimated program funding levels.
Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Table 23 provides estimates for the numbers of students in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields by education level
for the 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years. Tables 24 and 25 provide
additional information regarding students in STEM fields by gender for the
1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years. Table 26 provides additional
information regarding graduates in STEM fields by gender for the 1994-1995
and 2002-2003 academic years. Appendix V contains confidence intervals for
these estimates.
Table 23: Estimated Numbers of Students in STEM Fields by Education Level
for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
Academic year Academic year Education level/STEM field 1995-1996 2003-2004
Percentage change
Bachelor's level
Total 2,218,510 2,876,721
Agricultural sciences 101,885 87,025 b
Biological sciences 407,336 351,595
Computer sciences 261,139 456,303
Engineering 363,504 422,230
Mathematics 57,133 64,307 b
Physical sciences 107,832 129,207 b
Psychology 309,810 409,827
Social sciences 536,487 825,495
Technology 73,384 130,733
Master's level
Total 321,293 403,200
a a
Agricultural sciences 12,977
Biological sciences 34,701 19,467
b
Computer sciences 49,071 58,939
b
Engineering 66,296 90,234
a a
Mathematics 12,531
a a
Physical sciences 22,008
b
Psychology 30,008 31,918
Social sciences 82,177 144,895 76
a a
Technology 10,231
Doctoral level
b
Total 217,395 198,504
a a
Agricultural sciences 5,983
a a
Biological sciences 33,884
Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Academic year Academic year
Education level/STEM field 1995-1996 2003-2004 Percentage change
Computer sciences a 9,196 a
Engineering 32,181 35,687 b
Mathematics a 9,412 a
Physical sciences 38,058 24,973 b
Psychology 30,291 33,994 b
Social sciences 54,092 42,464 b
Technology a 2,912 a
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
Note: Enrollment totals differ from those cited in table 9 because table 9
includes students enrolled in certificate, associate's, other
undergraduate, first-professional degree, and post-bachelor's or
postmaster's certificate programs.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
bChanges between academic years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 are not
statistically significant at the 95-percent confidence level. See table 30
for significance of percentage changes.
Table 24: Estimated Percentages of Students by Gender and STEM Field for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 Male Female
Percent: 1995-1996 Percent: 2003-2004 Percent: 1995-1996 Percent: 2003-2004
Agricultural sciences
Total 58 55 42
Bachelor's 56 54 44
a a a a
Master's
a a
Doctorate 61
Biological sciences
Total 46 42 54 58 Bachelor's 45 42 55 58
a a
Master's 26 74
a a
Doctorate 50 50
Computer sciences
Total 67 76 33 24 Bachelor's 69 77 31 23
a a
Master's 69 31
a a
Doctorate 72 28
Engineering
Total 83 83 17 17 Bachelor's 83 83 17 17
a a
Master's 81 19
Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Male Female
Percent: 1995-1996 Percent: 2003-2004 Percent: 1995-1996 Percent:
2003-2004
a a
Doctorate 78 22
Mathematics
Total 62 55 38
Bachelor's 57 54 43
a a a a
Master's
a a
Doctorate 68
Physical sciences
Total 62 56 38
Bachelor's 56 53 44
a a a a
Master's
a a
Doctorate 68
Psychology
Total 26 26 74
Bachelor's 26 26 74
a a
Master's 21
a
Doctorate 30 a
Social sciences
Total 54 41 46 59
Bachelor's 52 42 48 58
Master's 51 35 49 65
Doctorate 83 46 17 54
Technology
Total 89 81 11 19
Bachelor's 88 81 12 19
a a a a
Master's
a a a a
Doctorate
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Table 25: Estimated Number of Women Students and Percentage Change by
Education Level and STEM Field for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
Number of women students
Percentage
change in
Education level/STEM 1995-1996 2003-2004 women students
field
Bachelor's level Agricultural sciences 44,444 39,702 b
Biological sciences 222,323 203,038 b
Computer sciences 82,013 104,824 b
Engineering 59,985 70,353 b
Mathematics 24,597 29,791 b
Physical sciences 47,421 60,203 b
Psychology 229,772 304,712 +33
Social sciences 258,023 475,544 +84
Technology 8,871 25,227 +184
Master's level Agricultural sciences a a a
Biological sciences a 14,415 a
Computer sciences a 18,000 a
Engineering a 17,042 a
Mathematics a 5,562 a
Physical sciences a 8,497 a
b
Psychology 23,857 25,342
Social sciences 40,395 94,169 +133
a a
Technology 1,280
a a
Doctoral level Agricultural sciences 2,353
a a
Biological sciences 17,074
a a
Computer sciences 2,556
a a
Engineering 7,868
a a
Mathematics 3,042
a a
Physical sciences 8,105
a a
Psychology 23,843
Social sciences 9,440 22,931 +143
a a
Technology 692
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
a Sample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
bChanges between academic years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 are not
statistically significant at the 95-percent confidence level. See table 29
for confidence intervals.
Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
Table 26: Comparisons in the Percentage of STEM Graduates by Field and
Gender for Academic Years 1994-1995 and 20022003
Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage
graduates, men, graduates, men, graduates, women, graduates, women,
STEM Degree/field 1994-1995 2002-2003 1994-1995 2002-2003
Bachelor's degree
Biological/agricultural sciences 50 40 50
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences 66 58 34
Engineering 83 80 17
Mathematics and computer sciences 65 69 35
Physical sciences 64 58 36
Psychology 27 22 73
Social sciences 50 45 50
Technology 90 88 10
Master's degree
Biological/agricultural sciences 52 45 48
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean 70 59 30
sciences
Engineering 84 79 16
Mathematics and computer sciences 70 66 30
Physical sciences 70 64 30
Psychology 28 23 72
Social sciences 51 45 49 55
Technology 81 73 19 27
Doctoral degree
Biological/agricultural sciences 63 57 37 43
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean 78 72 22 28
sciences
Engineering 88 83 12 17
Mathematics and computer sciences 80 76 20 24
Physical sciences 76 73 24 27
Psychology 38 31 62 69
Social sciences 62 55 38 45
Technology 89 100 11 0
Source: GAO calculations
based upon IPEDS data.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the Bachelor's,
Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Because the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) sample is a
probability sample of students, the sample is only one of a large number
of samples that might have been drawn. Since each sample could have
provided different estimates, confidence in the precision of the
particular sample's results is expressed as a 95-percent confidence
interval (for example, plus or minus 4 percentage points). This is the
interval that would contain the actual population value for 95 percent of
the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95 percent
confident that each of the confidence intervals in this report will
include the true values in the study population. The upper and lower
bounds of the 95 percent confidence intervals for each estimate relied on
in this report are presented in the following tables.
Table 27: Estimated Changes in the Numbers and Percentages of Students in
the STEM and Non-STEM Fields across All Education Levels, Academic Years
1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence intervals)
Lower and upper bounds of 95 percent confidence interval STEM field Non-STEM
field
Lower bound: number of students: 1995-1996 3,941,589 14,885,171
Upper bound: number of students: 1995-1996 4,323,159 15,601,065
20
Upper bound: percentage of students: 1995-1996 22
Lower bound: number of students: 2003-2004 4,911,850 16,740,049
Upper bound: number of students: 2003-2004 5,082,515 17,025,326
Lower bound: percentage of students: 2003-2004 22
Upper bound: percentage of students: 2003-2004 23
15
Upper bound: percentage change: 1995/96-2003/04 26.9
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 NPSAS data.
Note: The totals for STEM and non-STEM enrollments include students in
addition to the bachelor's, master's, and doctorate education levels.
These totals also include students enrolled in certificate, associate's,
other undergraduate, first-professional degree, and post-bachelor's or
post-master's certificate programs. The percentage changes between the
1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years for STEM and non-STEM students are
statistically significant.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the
Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Table 28: Numbers of Students by Education Level in all STEM Fields for
Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence intervals)
Total Bachelors Masters Doctorate
2,880,529 2,322,704 377,821 271,230
2,633,867 2,114,316 271,208 171,824
3,411,004 2,819,206 366,141 185,230
3,545,844 2,934,236 442,938 212,471
93,346 78,241 a a
151,132 130,144 a a
93,543 76,472 7,296 4,661
119,613 98,590 21,202 7,553
416,315 360,553 18,883 a
524,615 454,119 57,066 a
383,277 330,834 13,728 30,401
427,502 372,355 26,694 37,367
275,804 224,616 31,634 a
363,084 297,662 71,242 a
495,359 428,927 47,669 7,427
554,747 483,679 70,210 11,243
411,868 321,464 45,912 16,620
516,391 405,544 90,768 54,155
514,794 400,252 63,632 32,113
583,058 444,208 116,835 39,261
a a
68,083 42,910
aa
119,165 74,456 75,705 55,314 7,869 7,687 97,848 74,318 18,867 11,392
a
139,416 87,966 21,279
a
214,274 130,658 60,546 160,895 116,479 14,944 22,043 192,534 142,894
31,092 27,903 327,359 271,188 17,600 16,929 416,804 348,432 47,037 48,601
449,858 385,660 24,218 27,846 502,696 433,995 41,116 40,142 608,199
478,659 60,792 33,489 742,107 594,315 103,562 79,414
974,279 791,462 125,457 38,291
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the
Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Total Bachelors Masters Doctorate
a a
104,308 92,251
1,052,506 859,527 164,333 46,636
63,910 57,446 a a
130,347 118,492 5,556 1,814
158,418 143,848 17,158 4,421
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 NPSAS data.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
Table 29: Estimated Numbers and Percentage Changes in Women Students in
STEM Fields, Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence
intervals)
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower bound: Upper bound:
bound: bound: bound: bound:
Number of Number of Number of Number of Percentage Percentage
Students: Students: Students: Students: Change: Change:
1995-1996 1995-1996 2003-2004 2003-2004 1995/96-2003/04 1995/96-2003/04
Total
Total 1,100,766 1,260,962 1,546,340 1,638,269 24.9
Agricultural sciences 33,541 67,797 39,678 56,710 -41.2
Biological sciences 215,624 293,386 217,669 251,384 -23.4
Computer sciences 78,956 129,858 110,119 140,642 -12.6
Engineering 60,568 100,683 84,556 105,970 -14.3
Mathematics 21,805 46,907 31,207 45,593 -34.1
Physical sciences 42,352 91,230 66,408 87,203 -29.9
Psychology 236,730 311,792 331,616 376,179 9.6
Social sciences 267,155 348,561 562,529 622,759 65.2 119.8
Technology 5,136 13,993 21,339 33,060 52.3 361
Bachelor's
Total 909,030 1,045,868 1,271,939 1,354,847 24.1 44.7
Agricultural sciences 27,943 60,945 32,293 47,111 -47.8 26.4
Biological sciences 188,204 256,442 187,283 218,793 -24.4 7
Computer sciences 61,719 102,307 90,851 118,798 -8.1 63.7
Engineering 45,013 74,957 61,142 79,563 -15.8 50.3
Mathematics 16,558 32,636 23,487 36,094 -26 68.3
Physical sciences 32,641 62,201 51,259 69,147 -16.9 70.8
Psychology 197,530 262,014 284,138 325,287 12 53.3
Social sciences 220,004 296,042 449,103 501,985 55.3 113.3
Technology 5,185 13,867 19,582 30,872 40.2 328.6
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the
Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower bound: Upper bound:
bound: bound: bound: bound:
Number of Number of Number of Number of Percentage Percentage
Students: Students: Students: Students: Change: Change:
1995-1996 1995-1996 2003-2004 2003-2004 1995/96-2003/04 1995/96-2003/04
Master's Doctorate
Total 109,116 183,302 170,116 210,777 -5.6
Agricultural sciences a a a a a a
Biological sciences a a 11,330 16,806 a a
Computer sciences a a 11,907 24,093 a a
Engineering a a 10,989 24,604 a a
Mathematics a a 2,979 8,336 a a
Physical sciences a a 4,713 12,802 a a
Psychology 15,901 28,488 21,284 28,384 -58.1
Social sciences 26,605 54,185 79,619 108,720 45.8 220.5
Technology a a 235 3,485 a a
Total 38,103 79,875 81,553 95,377 -6.3 115.6
Agricultural Sciences a a 1,441 3,265 a a
Biological Sciences a a 14,455 19,692 a a
Computer Sciences a a 1,745 3,503 a a
Engineering a a 5,870 9,867 a a
a a a a
Mathematics 1,999 4,085
a a a a
Physical Sciences 6,298 9,913
a a a a
Psychology 19,198 28,489
Social Sciences 4,098 17,371 19,778 26,083 4.2 281.6
a a a a
Technology 254 1,339
Source: GAO calculations based upon NPSAS data.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the Bachelor's,
Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Table 30: Estimated Percentage Changes in Bachelor's, Master's, and
Doctoral Students in STEM Fields, Academic Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004
(95 percent confidence intervals)
Lower and upper bounds of 95 percent confidence interval
a a
no no
Total Bachelor's Master's Doctoral
a a
-34.8 -38.7
a a
11.9 9.5
a
-24.4 -24.8 -79.6
a
-2.6 -2.5 -8.3
a
yes yes yes
a
41.1 48.1 -34.8
a
89.5 101.3 75
a
yes yes no
3.5 1.4 -27.5
33.8 30.9 99.7
yes yes no no
-33.5 -21.8 a a
a a
23 46.9
a a
no no
a
-21.7 -6.6
a
24.4 46.3 1.4
a
no no no
11.7 14 -51.2 -48.8
45.4 50.5 63.9 73.3
yes yes no no
34.6 36.1 24.7 -59.3
66.5 71.6 127.9 16.3
yes yes yes no
a a
30 33.4
a a
119.6 122.9
a a
yes yes
20 23.1 1.8 -29.5
32.3 36.3 49.2 12.1
yes yes yes no
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1995-1996 and
2003-2004 NPSAS data.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the
Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Table 31: Estimates of STEM Students by Gender and Field for Academic
Years 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 (95 percent confidence intervals)
Women: Women: 2003-
1995-
Men: Men: 2003-2004 1996 2004 academic
1995-1996 academic
academic year academic year year year
Lower Upper Lower Upper
Lower Upper Statistically Lower Upper Statistically
STEM bound bound bound bound bound bound bound bound
fields significant significant
Agricultural sciences
Bachelor's 44 69 48 61 no 31 56 39 52 no
a a a a a a a a a a
Master's
a a a a a a
Doctoral 49 72 28 51
Biological sciences
Bachelor's 40 51 39 45 no 49 60 55 61 no
a a a a a a
Master's 14 46 54 89
a a a a a a
Doctoral 44 55 45 56
Computer sciences
Bachelor's 62 75 74 80 no 25 38 20 26 no
a a a a a a
Master's 61 78 22 39
a a a a a a
Doctoral 62 81 19 38
Engineering
Bachelor's 80 87 81 85 no 13 20 15 19 no
a a a a a a
Master's 73 88 12 27
a a a a a a
Doctoral 73 83 17 27
Mathematics
Bachelor's 44 70 46 61 no 30 56 39 54 no
a a a a a a a a a a
Master's
a a a a a a
Doctoral 59 77 23 41
Physical sciences
Bachelor's 46 66 48 59 no 34 54 41 52 no
a a a a a a a a a a
Master's
a a a a a a
Doctoral 62 73 27 38
Psychology
Bachelor's 20 32 23 28 no 68 80 72 77 no
a a a a a a
Master's 10 35 65 90
a a a a a a
Doctoral 20 39 61 80
Social sciences
Bachelor's 46 57 40 45 yes 43 54 55 60 yes Master's 38 64 28 42 no 36 62
58 72 no
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the
Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Women: Women: 2003-
1995-
Men: Men: 2003-2004 1996 2004 academic
1995-1996 academic
academic year academic year year year
Lower Upper Lower Upper
Lower Upper Statistically Lower Upper Statistically
STEM fields bound bound bound bound bound bound bound bound
significant significant
Doctoral 70 91 41 51 yes 9 30 49 59 yes
Technology
Bachelor's 81 93 77 85 no 7 19 15 23 no
a a a a a a a a a a
Master's
a a a a a a a a a a
Doctoral
Total students
Total 55 60 53 55 yes 40 45 45 47 yes
Bachelor's 54 58 53 55 no 42 46 45 47 no
Master's 46 63 48 57 no 37 54 43 52 no
Doctoral 63 82 53 58 yes 18 37 42 47 yes
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 NPSAS data.
aSample sizes are insufficient to accurately produce estimates.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the Bachelor's,
Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Table 32: Estimates of Students for Selected Racial or Ethnic Groups in
STEM Fields for All Education Levels and Fields for the Academic Years
1995-1996 and 2002-2003 (95 percent confidence intervals)
Lower bound: Upper bound: Lower bound: Upper bound:
number number number number
of students, of students, of students, of students,
academic academic academic academic
Race or ethnicity year, year, year, year,
1995-1996 1995-1996 2003-2004 2003-2004
African American 303,832 416,502 577,854 639,114
Hispanic 285,381 446,621 461,738 515,423
Asian/Pacific Islander 247,347 330,541 322,738 367,377
Native American 11,464 28,103 30,064 47,694
Other/multiple
minorities 17,708 44,434 150,264 183,174
.
Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the Bachelor's,
Master's, and Doctoral Levels
Lower bound: Upper bound: Lower bound: Upper bound:
Lower bound: percentage of percentage of percentage of percentage of
percentage Upper bound: students, academic students, academic students,
academic students, academic
change percentage change year 1995-1996 year 1995-1996 year 2003-2004 year
2003-2004
41 97 7 10 12
3 64 7 11 9
1 38 6 8 6
8 206 0 1 1
219 732 0 1 3
Source: GAO Calculations based upon 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 NPSAS data.
Table 33: Estimates of International Students in STEM Fields by Education
Levels for Academic Years 1995-1996 and 20032004 (95 percent confidence
intervals)
Lower Upper Lower Upper
bound: bound: bound:
number of number of number of bound: Lower bound: Upper
number bound:
students, students, students, of
students, percentage percentage
Education 1995-1996 1995-1996 2003-2004 2003-2004 change change
level
Total 80,812 142,192 154,466 186,322 12
Bachelor's 20,254 47,684 125,950 154,911 155
Master's 23,063 64,587 16,359 29,899 -76
Doctoral 20,525 59,861 5,168 10,735 -90
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 NPSAS data.
Appendix VI: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of STEM Employment by Gender,
Race or Ethnicity, and Wages and Salaries
The current population survey (CPS) was used to obtain estimates about
employees and wages and salaries in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) fields. Because the current population survey (CPS) is
a probability sample based on random selections, the sample is only one of
a large number of samples that might have been drawn. Since each sample
could have provided different estimates, confidence in the precision of
the particular sample's results is expressed as a 95 percent confidence
interval (e.g., plus or minus 4 percentage points). This is the interval
that would contain the actual population value for 95 percent of the
samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95 percent
confident that each of the confidence intervals in this report will
include the true values in the study population. We use the CPS general
variance methodology to estimate this sampling error and report it as
confidence intervals. Percentage estimates we produce from the CPS data
have 95 percent confidence intervals of plus or minus 6 percentage points
or less. Estimates other than percentages have 95 percent confidence
intervals of no more than plus or minus 10 percent of the estimate itself,
unless otherwise noted. Consistent with the CPS documentation guidelines,
we do not produce estimates based on the March supplement data for
populations of less than 75,000.
Table 34: Estimated Total Number of Employees by STEM Field between Calendar
Years 1994 and 2003
Lower Upper Lower Upper
bound: bound: bound: bound:
calendar calendar calendar calendar Statistically
year year year year
STEM fields 1994 1994 2003 2003 significant
Science 2,349,605 2,656,451 2,874,347 3,143,071 yes
Technology 1,285,321 1,515,671 1,379,375 1,568,189 no
Engineering 1,668,514 1,929,240 1,638,355 1,843,427 no
Mathematics/
computer 1,369,047 1,606,395 2,520,858 2,773,146
sciences yes
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1994 and 2003 CPS data.
Appendix VI: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of STEM Employment by Gender,
Race or Ethnicity, and Wages and Salaries
Table 35: Estimated Numbers of Employees in STEM Fields by Gender for
Calendar Years 1994 and 2003
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper
bound: bound: bound: bound: bound: bound: bound: bound:
calendar calendar calendar calendar calendar calendar calendar calendar
year year year year year year year year
1994, 1994, 2003, 2003, Statistically 1994, 1994, 2003, 2003,
Statistically STEM fields women women women women significant men men men
men significant
Science 1,594,527 1,827,685 yes 708,673 875,171 733,358 no
2,031,124 2,327,390 925,548
Technology 385,433 505,329 357,805 no 863,785 1,046,445 941,960 no
489,899 1,157,900
Engineering 107,109 174,669 126,947 no 1,538,198 1,777,778 1,440,510 no
210,407 1,703,920
Mathematics/
computer
sciences 372,953 491,053 610,649 yes 959,765 1,151,681 1,805,505
779,525 2,098,325 yes
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1994 and 2003 CPS data.
Table 36: Estimated Changes in STEM Employment by Gender for Calendar
Years 1994 and 2003
Lower bound: Upper bound:
Lower bound: Upper bound: calendar year Statistically
calendar year
STEM fields calendar year 1994 calendar year 1994 2003 significant
2003
Men Men
Science 28.87 34.40 24.84 30.30 yes
Technology 64.50 71.90 67.29 75.19 no
Engineering 90.28 94.05 87.93 92.69 no
Mathematics/
computer sciences 67.46 74.46 70.87 76.61 no
Women Women
Science 65.71 71.01 69.81 75.05 yes
Technology 28.26 35.35 24.97 32.55 no
Engineering 6.03 9.64 7.41 11.97 no
Mathematics/
computer sciences 25.69 32.39 23.51 29.01 no
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1994
and 2003 CPS data.
Appendix VI: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of STEM Employment by Gender,
Race or Ethnicity, and Wages and Salaries
Table 37: Estimated Percentages of STEM Employees for Selected Racial or Ethnic
Groups for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003
Lower bound: Upper bound: Lower bound: Upper bound: Statistically Race or
Ethnicity calendar year 1994 calendar year 1994 calendar year 2003
calendar year 2003 significant
Black or African
American 6.49 8.46 7.66 9.79 no
Hispanic or Latino
origin 4.76 6.60 8.83 11.09 yes
Other minorities 3.64 5.28 5.89 7.81 yes
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1994 and 2003 CPS data.
Table 38: Estimated Changes in Median Annual Wages and Salaries in the
STEM Fields for Calendar Years 1994 and 2003
Lower Upper Lower Upper
bound: bound: bound: bound:
calendar calendar calendar calendar Statistically
year year year year
STEM fields 1994 1994 2003 2003 significant
Science $42,212 $45,241 $44,650 $47,008 yes
Technology $36,241 $39,769 $38,554 $41,286 yes
Engineering $59,059 $63,134 $67,634 $71,749 yes
Mathematics/computer
sciences $51,922 $55,905 $58,801 $61,679 yes
Source: GAO calculations based upon 1994 and 2003 CPS data.
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Commerce
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Commerce
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Commerce
Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Commerce
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services
Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services
Appendix IX: Comments from the National Science Foundation
Appendix IX: Comments from the National Science Foundation
Appendix IX: Comments from the National Science Foundation
Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
GAO Contact Cornelia M. Ashby (202) 512-7215
Staff In addition to the contact named above, Carolyn M. Taylor,
Assistant Director; Tim Hall, Analyst in Charge; Mark Ward; Dorian
Herring; Patricia
Acknowledgments Bundy; Paula Bonin; Scott Heacock; Wilfred Holloway; Lise
Levie; John Mingus; Mark Ramage; James Rebbe; and Monica Wolford made key
contributions to this report.
Bibliography
Congressional Research Service, Foreign Students in the United States:
Policies and Legislation, RL31146, January 24, 2003, Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Immigration: Legislative Issues on
Nonimmigrant Professional Specialty (H-1B) Workers, RL30498, May 5, 2005,
Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Monitoring Foreign Students in the United
States: The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS),
RL32188, October 20, 2004, Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Science, Engineering, and Mathematics
Education: Status and Issues, 98-871 STM, April 27, 2004, Washington, D.C.
Council on Competitiveness, Innovate America, December 2004, Washington,
D.C.
Council of Graduate Schools, NDEA 21: A Renewed Commitment to Graduate
Education, June 2005, Washington, D.C.
Institute of International Education, Open Doors: Report on International
Educational Exchange, 2004, New York.
Jackson, Shirley Ann, The Quiet Crisis: Falling Short in Producing
American Scientific and Technical Talent, Building Engineering & Science
Talent, September 2002, San Diego, California.
NAFSA: Association of International Educators, In America's Interest:
Welcoming International Students, Report of the Strategic Task Force on
International Student Access, January 14, 2003, Washington, D.C.
NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Toward an International
Education Policy for the United States: International Education in an Age
of Globalism and Terrorism, May 2003, Washington, D.C.
National Center for Education Statistics, Qualifications of the Public
School Teacher Workforce: Prevalence of Out-of-Field Teaching 1987-88 to
1999-2000, May 2002, revised August 2004, Washington, D.C.
National Science Foundation, The Science and Engineering Workforce
Realizing America's Potential, National Science Board, August 14, 2003,
Arlington, Virginia.
Bibliography
National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2004,
Volume 1, National Science Board, January 15, 2004, Arlington, Virginia.
Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and
Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development,
Land of Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science,
Engineering, and Technology, September 2000.
A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and
Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Before It's Too Late, September 27,
2000.
Seymour, Elaine, and Nancy M. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why
Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Westview Press, 1997, Boulder,
Colorado.
The National Academies, Policy Implications of International Graduate
Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States, 2005, Washington,
D.C.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, The Nation's Report Card, NAEP 2004:
Trends in Academic Progress, July 2005, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Education, The Secretary's Third Annual Report on
Teacher Quality, Office of Postsecondary Education, 2004, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2003 Yearbook of Immigration
Statistics, Office of Immigration Statistics, September 2004, Washington,
D.C.
GAO's Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400Congressional U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street
NW, Room 7125 Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***