Calvert Report September 2002 High School Science and Mathematics in Maryland: A Study in Failure Introduction This is the first Calvert Institute study to be issued in 18 months, and reflects the work of a reconstituted Board and new Executive Director. The Institute intends to continue to reproduce in Maryland proposals for market-based reforms that have not received serious discussion, though its basic thrust will seek to promote better government by promoting discussion from a variety of points of view, of areas of public policy that have been neglected by the Maryland press and its political leadership. Our first effort in this new format centers on the state of math and science education in Maryland public high schools. Other subjects may be explored in the months that follow. Those under consideration include the trial de novo in Maryland courts, the governance of Maryland higher education, and the possible introduction of congestion charging techniques as a means of reducing the need for now transportation projects. We urge readers to subscribe to future publications and receive invitations to Institute events through use of the form on the back cover. Dozens of impartial reports of public and private, state and national, commissions and studies have warned of a crisis in recruitment of high school science and math teachers. All point to a single obvious cause: the failure of public schools to offer such teachers pay reflecting what they can command in the private work force. This failure in turn is due to one overriding cause: the single salary schedule in local teachers union contracts, which only a few jurisdictions allow to be varied. There follows a summary of the leading studies and of their limited effects in Maryland. National Reports Early in 2002, the United States Secretary of Education issued his Annual Report on Teacher Quality, Meeting the Highly Qualified Teachers Challenge. That report indicated (at p.65) that nationwide, about 6% of the nations middle school and high school math teachers and about 7% of its science teachers and never received an initial certification or license from any state. In Maryland, 508 of 2463 math teachers, or 21% had never been certified and the same was true of 480 of 2,702 science teachers, or 18% of the total. Shortly thereafter, the Education Trust issued a report, All Talk and No Action: Putting an End to Out-of-Field Teaching which found that Nationwide, over one-third (35%) of sec- ondary-level math classes are taught by someone lacking even a minor in math or in a math-related field. . .That figure climbs to nearly half (49%) of math classes in high-poverty schools and 44% of math classes in high-minority schools . . . About 70% of middle-grade math classes in high-poverty and high-minority schools are assigned to a teacher who lacks even a college minor in math or a math-related field. (at 6-7). The Report also stressed the importance of using alternate certification to recruit high quality teachers, noting that in New York City Three years ago, the city schools contracted with the New Teacher Project to recruit able alternate route candidates who wanted to teach in hard-to-staff schools. In three months, project staff produced 2,300 candidates. In 2001, that number grew to more than 8,000. Last year, it soared to 12,899 complete and eligible applicationsincluding 1,371 who were math-qualified, 1,934 who were bilingual-qualified, and 5,427 qualified in special education. . . . Twenty-two percent of the eventual cohort of 1,200 teaching fellows had graduate degrees; their college GPAs averaged 3.5; and 42% were people of color. (at 12). In 1996, the National Commission on Teaching and Americans Future; in its Report. What Matters Most: Teaching for Americas Future, found that 56% of high school students taking physical science are taught by teachers without degrees in physical science. 23% of high school students studying mathematics are taught by teachers without degrees in mathematics. In 1997, the Clinton Administration Department of Education issued a highly unspecific report: A Back to School Report on the Baby Boom Echo: Here Come the Teenagers predicting rising enrollments and acknowledging a shortage of well-trained teachers in their chosen field. In 1993, the National Center for Education Statistics issued a report. Teachers Salaries: Are they Competitive, comparing the average starting salaries of new bachelors degree recipients in teaching and in non-teaching occupations with the following results: Teaching $19,913 Public Affairs and Social Sciences 19,227 Math and Physical Sciences 26,040 Computer Science 30,419 The study concluded : New bachelor degree recipients in the fields of computer science, math and physical science . . . who choose to teach do so at substantial financial cost. A 1991 study of the National Center for Education Statistics, revealed that notwithstanding the greater demand in the private sector for high school teachers, particularly those with math and science specialities, union contracts ensured that there was virtually no difference in the compensation of elementary and secondary school teachers. In 1991, secondary school teachers received average salaries (in constent dollars) of $33,701, as against $32,448 for elementary school teachers, a differential of less than 3.9%. In 1972, the figures were $32,757 for secondary and $30,775 for elementary, a differential of about 6.5%. A 1988 study of the National Center for Education Statistics, revealed that of the nations 2,323,204 public school teachers, only 28,769 received pay incentives for teaching in a field of shortage. A 2001 Report of the National Commission on Science Teaching for the Twenty First Century is entitled Before Its Too Late. The Commission, under the chairmanship of former Sen. John Glenn of Ohio, included William Kirwan, now Chancellor of the University of Maryland, Superintendent Iris Metts of Prince Georges County, and Congresswoman Constance Morella. The Commission found that incentives whether in the form of cash awards, salary increases, support for further education or community wide recognition are needed to encourage deserving math and science teachers to remain in teaching and improve their skills . . . Salaries of all teachers must be made more competitive, but especially for mathematics and science teachers whose combined preparation and skills command high wages in the private sector. The Commission found a marked deterioration in the performance of American students on math and science tests as compared with foreign students the further they move up the education ladder: General Science 4th Grade: 3rd among 26 countries 8th grade: 17th among 41 countries 12th grade: 16th among 21 countries Mathematics 4th grade -12th among 26 countries 8th grade - 28th among 41 countries 12th grade - 17th among 21 countries Reported American math performance levels were below those of 30 years ago. The performance in specialized areas was even worse. Among 20 nations whose 12th grade performance was measured, none were lower than the United States in advanced mathematics and physics (at 10-11). Non-resident aliens received 34.6% of bachelors degrees granted by American colleges in engineering, math and information science and 49% of masters degrees in these subjects (at 12-13). Special immigration laws were enacted allowing immigration of 300,000 computer workers between 1998 and 2002, the American school system having failed to produce a sufficient supply of such workers (at 13). In 1993-94, the Commission found that 20% of science and 25% math high school teaching positions were filled by teachers without even a minor in their discipline (at 19). 66% of science and math teachers leaving the teaching force cited poor salaries as the reason (at 33). 56% of high school physical science students are taught by out-of-field teachers, as are 27% of high school mathematics students (at 19). The Commission, heavily influenced by its union members, avoided the most obvious recommendations, suggesting in highly general terms that School districts must create new salary structures that recognize added responsibilities and achievements in offering signing bonuses and giving salary credit for all previous experience in establishing pathways to teacher certification that encourage recent college graduates and people with degrees in math and science to pursue teaching (at 35). The Commission, citing the National Center for Education Statistics, found that average compensation for teachers was $35,048 as against $49,362 for other bachelor degree holders. In math and science, baccalaureate degree holders can earn twice as much in industry as in teaching (at 36). A February 2002 report of the National Research Council, Attracting Ph.D.s to K-12 Education: A Demonstration Program for Science, Math and Technology found that certification requirements were a major obstacle to the entry of math-science Ph.D.s into the teaching force. 44% of the sample indicated that they would consider teaching if they could become certified in an intensive summer education course, but the number dropped to 14% of the sample when told of the one-year of education courses commonly required. Among those who had previously expressed interest in teaching, more than two-thirds would be interested if a summer program were the only obstacle, but only 22% if a one-year course was required. This illustrates the costs imposed by certification requirements imposing on applicants the burden of large numbers of education courses. A 2001 Report by the National Research Council, Educating Teachers of Science, Mathematics and Technology was more explicit in recommending that science and math teachers be paid salaries that are commensurate and competitive with other professions in science, math and technology. (p.110). An earlier study of the National Research Council, Attracting Science and Math Ph.D.s to Secondary School Education (2000) found that there was a large pool of science Ph.D.s who were stuck in post-doctoral positions because of the limited demand for science teachers in colleges and universities. Nationally, there were 13,751 post-doctoral fellows in the biological sciences, 3712 in chemistry, 2236 in physics, and 258 in mathematical sciences. . Notwithstanding this, and notwithstanding that 36% of math-science Ph.D.s had considered secondary school teaching, only .8% of math-science Ph.D.s were actually engaged in secondary school teaching, because of the barriers to entry. A June 2001 report by the Maryland Mathematics Commission, Keys to Mathematics Success contained similar findings. The Commission cited an unspecified University of Maryland study for the proposition that As many as 10,000 high tech positions are currently unfilled in the State of Maryland. Nationally, of the estimated 3.4 million IT jobs, 10% are unfilled. The Report alleges that corporate need for information systems technicians is increasing at a 25% annual rate.. Maryland has a critical shortage of certified math teachers. Only 65 math teachers were prepared in Maryland during 1998-99. In order to meet this shortage, an unfortunate trend has been to hire uncertified teachers. It is time for boards of education at every level to consider salary inducements for math teachers. Higher salaries may be achieved by extending the school year so that all teachers are responsible for a 200-day school year or work for 10 months rather than 9. We need to find creative ways to keep our best and brightest math teachers. (at 4). Assessing the math performances of Maryland students, who came from a state with the fifth highest per capita income and the 16th highest per capita expenditure on public education, and the one with the lowest percentage of children in poverty, it was found that in 1996 on the National NAEP mathematics test, 4th grade Maryland students were 29th among the 44 states tested and 8th grade students 14th among 44. While 68% of the states students taking SAT tests had four years of high school mathematics, only 24% had calculus (at 16). The state imposes a math test, the MFMT test, as a condition of high school graduation. It tests 6th grade math skills (at 22). In the most recent year, the states school systems recruited only 17 new state-certified middle school math teachers. School districts have had to use provisionally certified teachers, elementary certified teachers, and teachers from other fields (e.g. physical education) to fill teaching slots at the middle school level (at 34). This is so even though a 1999 study by MSDE found that Teacher quality is the best single predictor of student success. In 1993, a cross-national study by the Educational Testing Service revealed that only 24% of Maryland students tested at the proficient or advanced levels in mathematics, as against 41% of students in Taiwan, 37% of those in Korea, and 33% of those in Switzerland. The Maryland Teacher Staffing Report 2001-2003 is not a Calvert Institute document, it was adopted by the State Board of Education on August 28, 2001. Almost all the members of the Board, other than veteran education reformer Walter Sondheim, Jr., owe their appointments to the States current Governor, Parris N. Glendening. Among their number is the former counsel to the Maryland State Teachers Association, Walter S. Levin, Esq. The report is prepared pursuant to a mandate of State law, section 18-703 of the Annotated Code of Maryland. It is similar in format to reports prepared under the same mandate for prior years. The Report and its predecessors record a continuing and accelerating deterioration in the States recruitment and training of qualified math and science teachers. The situation revealed by the Report has gone unreported by the press, and has generated no significant corrective proposals from either the Glendening administration, the State Board of Education, or the State Superintendent of Schools, Nancy S. Grasmick. The Report begins by describing the incentives offered by the State for the recruitment of teachers. Most of these incentives are scholarship or loan programs. Only the Christa McAuliffe Memorial Teacher Education Award is focused on critical shortage areas. Though originally focused on math and science, it was diluted by legislation proposed by the Glendening administration and now extends to all critical shortage areas, including English for speakers of other languages and various special education areas. 92 scholarships were awarded in 2001-02. The only salary supplement program provided by the state is that under the Quality Teacher Incentive Act of 1999. This provides up to $2,000 per year for teachers earning certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, and a $2,000 annual stipend for teachers with Advanced Professional Certificates who work in challenge schools. The state as of July 2001 expended $103,500 on added stipends for 69 National Board Certified Teachers and $5,428,000 on added stipends for 2,714 teachers with advanced certificates in challenged schools and reconstitution and reconstituted schools. Since total instructional salaries in state schools amounted to $2,486,615,029 in 2000-01 the special incentives accounted for less than one-fifth of one percent of total instructional spending. The maximum possible benefitto a National Board Certified Teacher in a reconstitution school was $4,000 per year, not enough to alter many decisions of science and mathematics teachers to enter or abandon the teaching force. The staffing projection for 2001-02 shows a projected staffing pool for mathematics teachers of 434, as against 588 projected new hires and 383 actual hires in 2000. The projections for computer science, chemistry, physical science and physics are even more disastrous. Tables 1, 2, and 3 in the Report are summarized in the accompanying table below: The 1999 legislation did offer one meaningful teacher recruitment incentive, which expires on June 30, 2004: provisions allowing retired teachers to be exempt from earnings limitations if they are re-employed in critical shortage areas, geographic shortage areas or reconstitution schools. This provision effectively applies to all retired teachers, since all 24 Maryland jurisdictions have been declared to be shortage areas. Under this provision, 687 teachers were re-employed in 2000-01, 467 of them in Prince Georges County, where they now make up 5% of the instructional force. In Baltimore, Frederick and Wicomico counties about 1% of the instructional force is employed under this provision. New legislation, Senate Bill 221 of 2001 allows retirees from the state or from school systems to be exempt from earnings limitations if re-employed by an employer other than their original employer. This provision may also help to relieve the crisis caused by impending retirements by adding retired higher education teachers to the recruitment pool. The states Alternative teaching program based on issuance of a Resident Teaching Certificate to attract liberal arts graduates and career changers, appears to have been strangled by union pressure. It is dependent on local option. In 2000-2001 only two of the states 24 school systems, Baltimore City and Prince Georges County had RTC programs, although it is said that Howard County and the Eastern Shore Education Consortium are creating new programs and that a third program is being added to the two in Baltimore City. Although this program became effective in 1991, more than 10 years ago, it supplies less than 1% of the states new hires who totalled, 7,649 in 2000. By contrast, New Jerseys program in its third year provided 18% of that states new teachers, with attrition rates below the average. (See E. Schecter. The New Jersey Provisional Teacher Program: A Third Year Report (Trenton: NJDE, 1987)). The Report succinctly observes: The largest number of graduates continue to be in elementary education and early childhood education, two areas that are never on the shortage list (pg. 39). Mathematics, which is annually on the critical shortage list, had 67 graduates in 2000, compared to 81 graduates in 1999. There were no reported education candidates graduating in computer science in 2000, compared to one in 1999 and 2 in 1998 . . . In the critical shortage science areas, there were no graduates in physical science, 4 in physics, 5 in earth/space, and 16 in chemistry. The report further notes Certain content areas, such as mathematics and computer science, are in demand in the private sector. Both of these areas are continually listed as critical shortage areas in this annual report. Computer science has been identified as a critical shortage area every year since being introduced as a certification area in 1992. When the state recruits only a small fraction of the needed computer science, math and science teachers, the result is either the dumbing down of courses or failure to offer them. It is not surprising that less than a quarter of the States SAT candidates have studied calculus: the teachers are not there to teach it. A Visionary Panel for Better Schools reported to the Superintendent in early 2002: it noted: Supply and demand issues have led to a variety of financial incentives, however the dollar amounts have been minimal and there is no evidence that the minimal supports that have been offered have actually had an impact on teacher supply. (at 92). It referred to the shortage of teachers in specific content areas (at 93) but except for urging stipends and insurance for career changes and an 11 or 12 month school year tiptoed around the single salary schedule. Its membership was drawn almost entirely from schools of education, unions and associated entities. Teachers Unions and the Math/Science Shortage To any labor economist, the meaning of the numbers in the Teachers Staffing Report is clear. Maryland adequately compensates, and in some subdivisions probably overcompensates, early childhood and elementary education teachers, who are never in shortage and are called forth in large numbers. It under-compensates computer science, earth science, chemistry, physical science and physics teachers. Realism would clearly demand, if not reduced compensation for the former classes, at least enhanced compensation for the specialties in shortage. Nationally the seniority-based single salary schedule has resulted in squeezing career-minded men and younger people out of the teaching force. In 1971, 34.3% of U.S. public school teachers were men, a percentage which declined to 25.6% in 1996. The median age of teachers increased during the same years from 35 to 44. That enhanced compensation can be provided in several ways. The mildest of these, that proposed by the Maryland Mathematics Commission, giving math teachers 10 month rather than nine-month contracts, is almost certainly insufficient. It amounts to an 11% increase in compensation, about $5,000 per year for a typical teacher; not nominal, but probably not enough to change vocational plans. A second method, the easiest and most flexible of implementation, would authorize principals or school boards to accord teachers in scarce specialties added seniority credits. Thus Article XIX of the current Talbot County contract provides: Teachers hired after July 1, 1994 shall be placed on the appropriate scale according to certification, experience and education, but not to exceed five (5) years of experience (step 6) of the appropriate column. In areas of critical need the Board may make exceptions as recommended by the Superintendent, but shall not exceed fifteen (15) years of experience (step 16). The extra 10 years of experience credit for beginning teachers with a masters degree is the difference between a beginning salary of $34,900 and one of $43,800. For one with 5 years experience, it is the difference between $39,000 and $50,900. These amounts are almost certainly enough to resolve the recruiting problem. When the Calvert Institute studied Marylands 24 teachers union contracts in 1998, only the Talbot, Prince Georges and Allegheny contracts allowed this flexibility, the provisions in the Prince Georges and Allegheny contracts being more general then the Talbot county contract quoted. A new review, limited to the current contracts of the big eight subdivisions: Anne Arundel, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Carroll, Harford, Howard, Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties, discloses that Anne Arundel County now has a provision stating Experience credit may now be received for up to 12 years of relevant professional experience within their areas of certification which should be helpful in recruiting career-changing scientists and mathematicians. Remarkably enough, Montgomery and Howard Counties, generally regarded as the standard-bearers in quality, both of which are reported to have shortages in science teachers, have no such provisions. In addition, the much-vaunted new Baltimore City school board has failed to secure such a provision in its new contract, even though its flagship science school, Baltimore Polytechnic Institute, has reported difficulty in recruiting a computer science teacher. A third approach would provide separate contracts for senior high schools, in recognition of the more specialized character of their teaching staffing pools. Projected new hires for most non-scientific high school disciplines are in roughly even balance, other than for history, as to which there is a substantial surplus. State law, however, precludes any effort to give appropriate added dignity to high school teaching by mandating a single bargaining unit for each subdivision, §6-404 of the State Education Article, a provision which cries out for repeal. Finally, one might have a separate schedule for scarce disciplines. This approach would understandably be unwelcome to union officers, whose relations with their members would be greatly complicated by it. The second approach, already accepted by Maryland teachers unions in four counties, is thus the indicated one. At one of its recent conventions, the National Education Association, parent of 23 of 24 of Marylands teachers bargaining agents, adopted a resolution (against the advice of its national leadership), opposing all proposals for merit pay or extra pay for source disciplines. Not to be outdone, the President of the MSTA, Patricia Foerster, had been quoted as opposing extra pay for science teachers: sorry about that. If a status quo which in all but 4 counties has defied wave after wave of national and state reports and studies is to be changed, this will require an aroused business, scientific and higher education community and more leadership from the State House than has been forthcoming in recent years. Special High Schools Roughly a dozen states, in recognition of the fact that in mathematics, as in music, exceptional talent manifest itself and must be nurtured at a young age, have established specialized math and science high schools, which have compiled enviable college admissions records. Governor William Donald Schaefers proposals for such a school, or four or five regional day schools, were defeated by union opposition. At least two Maryland subdivisions, Baltimore City and Montgomery County, maintain specialized science schools, Baltimore Polytechnic Institute and Churchill High School, the latter one of the most highly rated public high schools in the country, and the former once the same. Both have experienced some recruiting difficulties, and neither enjoys the support from and cooperation with business and industry that it should have. One possible step toward this end would be for each county to be required to similarly designate a flagship science school with each such school to have a governing board including representatives of industry and higher education, persons selected from or by parents and teachers, designees of local government and higher education, and persons co-opted by the other members of the board. Such boards, similar to those which exist for all English schools under the 1988 Education Reform Act, would replace their own members in the manner of the boards of private schools, except for the local government and school board designees. Boards thus constituted would be able to enlist industry cooperation and contributions, as well as supplementation of equipment and instructional staff by the business, scientific and higher education community, and would allow Marylands public school system to gain full advantage from the plethora of federal research institutions in the State. The British Example In Britain, prior to the 1960s, students were rigorously separated at the age of 11 and attended either academic grammar schools, equal or superior in quality to fee-paying schools, or so-called secondary modern schools, recognized to be disaster areas. The Labor government introduced comprehensive high schools in place of this divided system in most parts of the country. These provided a better floor than the secondary modern schools but a sharp fall in the percentage of graduates of state schools gaining admission to the more selective universities resulted. In the 1980s , a movement toward somewhat greater specialization began, through the creation of City Technology schools, which are judged to have been quite successful, and by making all comprehensive schools more self-governing institutions with their own boards. The new Labor government has largely carried forward this approach, while instituting reforms of its own in teachers pay schedules, allowing extra pay for science disciplines and various forms of merit pay for teachers and reducing benefits based primarily on seniority. Many of these reforms are described in the British Department of Education and Training web site. Specialized Science Schools The most famous of all specialized public science school is the Bronx High School of Science in New York, which has produced five winners of the Nobel Prize. Baltimore Polytechnic Institute was similarly conceived and has a similar history, yet it cannot now recruit a qualified computer science teacher, thanks to the unions beloved single salary schedule: its curriculum does not include computer science (see box). The States School systems in all expended last year three quarters of a billion dollars on their highly regulated special education purposes involving 112,000 students. Instructional expenditures on all the states remaining 740,000 students approximated 2.7 billion. Much has been spent not always productively spent on providing a decent minimum little has been spent on cultivating excellence. A state whose economy, and whose ability to assist the disadvantaged, is dependent upon its scientific and technical establishment can no longer afford its current mediocrity. A state fifth in per capita income, containing within its borders the National Institutes of Health, the Johns Hopkins University, Hospital, and Applied Physics Laboratory, the Goddard Space Center, the Beltsville Agricultural Center, a plethora of government and military research establishments and a large biotechnology industry should not be numbered 24th or 19th among 44 states in the performance of its students on a national mathematics examination, nor should only 24% of its SAT candidates have taken calculus. Something is badly wrong here, the complacency of the present state administration to the contrary notwithstanding . The Survey Letter The following letter was sent to approximately 550 mathematics, chemistry and physics faculty at Marylands public universities: I am writing you on behalf of the Calvert Institute for Policy Research, a non-partisan think tank that has recently reconstituted itself and is embarking on a program of publications designed to focus on neglected areas of public policy. One of the subjects on which we are focusing is the state of math and science education in Marylands public high schools. A number of recent federal and state reports suggest that our public high schools are failing to recruit sufficient numbers of qualified math and science teachers. Various cures have been suggested, including variations to the single salary schedule in teachers union contracts, summer institutes for teachers, and the enhanced use of specialized math and science high schools. In our view, the addition of yet another dry report to the shelf-full that have failed to influence policy in this field would not be useful. Instead, we have decided to seek the individual reflections of those best qualified to assess the situation, the several hundred teachers of math, physics and chemistry in Marylands public colleges. We are confining this letter to teachers at public colleges because they have a largely Maryland-based enrollment and most of their students are products of the Maryland public school system. We intend to publish the text of this letter, followed by the unexpurgated and unedited responses of its recipients, arranged in alphabetical order. We would ask that you give us the benefit of your reflections, in not more than 250 words, on the adequacy of high school preparation in your discipline, whether such preparation is improving or getting worse, and what in your view should be done to foster its quality. Your response will be published verbatim, and our publication will be sent to Maryland news media, each member of the General Assembly, and each public high school principal and school board member in Maryland, among others.*** Sincerely, George W. Liebmann, Executive Director Comments from College Science Faculty The comments received were varied, and center of the difficulty or recruiting and retaining qualified high school science teachers, the effects of excessive computer use, the value of specialized science programs, and the sometimes perverse effect of teaching to the test. They will not be further summarized, and are set out in full below. Cumulatively, they constitute a compelling call to action. In terms of high school preparation for the teaching of mathematics, I believe our discipline does a superb job of preparing teachers to teach mathematics. The problem is that many of those who prepare to teach the subject at the high school level do not do so, because they can earn much higher salaries elsewhere. If they could receive comparable salaries for a teaching job, they would probably take it. I am excited about one of our present initiatives for enhancing the mathematical and pedagogical preparation of inservice middle-school teachers. The program is called Math ADEPT and it is funded by the National Science Foundation. The program being housed at Salisbury University, we have middle-school teachers from Maryland's nine Eastern Shore counties, the two Eastern Shore Virginia counties, and Sussex County, Delaware, in this program. This program is a collaborative venture among university mathematics professors, university education professors, and mathematics supervisors in the local school systems. We are optimistic that the Delmarva region will have some of the best prepared middle-school teachers of mathematics in the nation. Anything we can do to help mathematics teachers perform their jobs better is greatly appreciated by these teachers. They are a dedicated bunch of people who really want to do excel at what they do. Homer Austin Professor of Mathematics Salisbury State University. I teach Algebra/Trig based course in Physics. At the beginning of the semester I ask the students to take a diagnostic test -- 10 problems on elementary Algebra/Trig. Year after year (1975-present), I discover that less than 1/3rd of the class, of 50-100 students gets the correct answers. A simple quadratic equation seems too difficult. Fractions present another serious challenge. Some of this may be explained by the fact that I get to see them in their sophomore, or later, years and they may have forgotten. However, in many conversations it is claimed that they had only a very cursory exposure. The spectrum of students as well as the schools that they attended is so wide that it is far from obvious what small set of corrective measures would help. Certainly, it would be very useful to increase the number of weekly hours spent on math not only during school hours but also in homework so that the student can develop fluency in math as well as gain confidence that math is not beyond my capabilities. S.M. Bhagat Professor of Physics University of Maryland, College Park I can testify that the status of mathematics education in the Maryland high schools is bad. I cannot say that it has changed materially since I have been teaching at Towson University. I am not at all sure what is to be done about it. On the other hand, I have the impression that those who are going to devote themselves to high school teaching are not in the top of the class. On the other hand, I did know one student who was aiming to teach high school math and was in the very top of the class. I met him several years after graduation and he was disgusted with high school students. They had no discipline and felt quite free to tell the teacher that they were not interested in what he had to offer. It was a liberty that neither he nor I would have taken with our teachers and we were amazed that contemporary students would. James P. Coughlin Professor of Mathematics Towson University It is not easy to answer your question. Are the students better or worse prepared for university math? Having many years of experience teaching calculus, I can't tell whether some students inability to perform well is due to poor preparation at the high school level or their recalcitrance at learning the material. I have seen very good students who just absorb the material very easily and others, who choose to repeat the course with me two or more times. Does this make me a bad teacher? Obviously, if students come back to my sections after having already failed once or more, they must find something worthwhile to my teaching. Even if students' ability in algebra is deficient, which is often the case, they don't need 12 more years of math to catch up. I have observed that once they decide that it is in their power to learn what is needed, they pass the course and go on to majors that do require a substantial background in math.Let's not blame the high schools a fortiori. Lets not blame the teachers either. Make students more responsive to learning. How? I don't know. Perhaps the standards for passing math at the high school level should be raised. Ruth Edidin Professor of Mathematics Morgan State University As a frequent teacher of calculus, I have noticed that many students come to our university having had a calculus course in high school, but lacking basic skills in precalculus mathematics. Here I have in mind inequalities, trigonometry, laws of exponents and logarithms, graphs, even basic algebra and arithmetic. Furthermore, their calculus training is often a hindrance rather than an asset in university calculus, due primarily to misconceptions. My recommendation is that the school systems place more emphasis on precalculus topics and offer calculus only to those students who have (demonstrably) mastered the basics. Robert L. Ellis Professor of Mathematics University of Maryland As a UMCP physics department faculty member, I am confronted by the failure noted in your letter whenever I teach in our undergraduate program. I have participated in an NRC study related somewhat to this issue. It can be found on-line at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.10129. html and in synopsis form at http://www.physicstoday.org/pt/vol-55/iss-5/p48.html Although there is more that I could say, I have noted that my colleague, Prof. O. W. Greenberg has already sent you comments. S.J.Gates, Jr. John S. Toll Professor of Physics and Center for String and Particle Theory Director University of Maryland, College Park Current high school students rely too much on their graphing calculators and other technological aids. For instance, while those tools might enable them to plot a given function over a given domain, they do not learn to recognize a given plot as the shape of a basic mathematical function. Overall, work in high schools does not appear to advance to any level of independent thinking, but is limited to the application of memorized techniques. The key to improving this situation is to staff the classrooms on all levels with teachers, who themselves do not exhibit the bad habits of their students, that is who themselves have a deeper command of the subject they are teaching. It is clearly a disservice to students, if classrooms are staffed by teachers out-of-subject-area. In order to provide those mathematics and science teachers to the schools, more mathematically qualified students need to be attracted to majoring in mathematics and science for careers in teaching. However, todays students are savvy shoppers for their careers. When I mention the option of K-12 teaching to typical undergraduate students, they are turned off by the bad work environment in many schools that they remember very well from their own recent experience. Combined with the low starting salaries, it is very difficult to excite anyone about education as a career. Matthias K. Gobbert Assistant Professor Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of Maryland, Baltimore County These comments are especially directed to the teaching of high school chemistry. Based on observations of many Maryland students taking first year college chemistry courses over an extended period of time, it appears that while there has been steady improvement overall school preparation is still very mixed with some students coming in with excellent backgrounds and others with very poor backgrounds. It should also be noted that success in chemistry also depends on students having a solid background in mathematics and success in college chemistry is also helped by exposure to a good high school physics course. High school chemistry courses should be based on a curriculum that is not merely a miniature college chemistry course but one that provides a broad exposure to chemistry with sufficient descriptive chemical material so that students know what chemistry deals with. Adequate time for laboratory should be provided. Chemistry classes should be taught by chemistry majors. Theses majors are the students who have been exposed to the various areas and theories that constitute modern chemistry. The necessity of hiring proficient chemistry majors is apparent but here must also be an understanding that they must be kept in the teaching system and be encouraged to remain current in their field also. This should be one by whatever means is necessary and reasonable including higher salaries to be competitive with private industry and government and providing summer opportunities for research and/or study at nearby academic institutions. In summary excellent teachers, curriculum and support are the keys to success in high school chemistry. Robert H. Goldsmith Professor Emeritus of Chemistry St. Marys College of Maryland What I would most like to share, in the context of current political debates about education, is my severe misgivings about the increased use of standardized tests as instruments for accountability. It is my perception that there is already much too much teaching to tests taking place in the secondary schools; indeed it has conditioned the expectations of the students in many college courses. The manifestation of this problem is that many of my students think entirely in terms of process, and are oblivious of any attempt to communicate concepts. They want to learn step by step how to solve problems of the sort that they will be tested on, and cannot be persuaded that it might be reasonable to spend class time on material that will not be directly tested, or to test their understanding of concepts by posing problems for which no method of solution has been explicitly presented. Paul Green Professor of Mathematics University of Maryland My comments are based on my experience teaching physics to sophomore engineering students as a faculty member in the department of physics at the University of MarylandCollege Park from Sept.1961 to the present. The level of preparation in mathematics and physics has decreased markedly over this time. This has resulted in a dilution of the sophomore engineering physics courses and a lowering of expectations for performance of the students. I believe standards, especially in mathematics, should be higher in public high schools. It is particularly important that the mathematics that is taught must have applications that the students can understand. My children were exposed to group theory as a set of definitions and axioms while public school students. No applications were given for this material. As a result my children saw no point in the subject, learning it only to pass the tests given in class, and promptly forgot it afterwards. Group theory has many important applications. I use it extensively in my work. However it is not an appropriate subject for high school students. Also rigorous proofs of theorems are not appropriate for high school students. They must be shown the usefulness and relevance of the mathematics they are taught, Physics certainly offers meaningful applications of useful mathematics. University faculty in physics and mathematics should have a central role in designing the curricula for science and mathematics in the public schools. That is much too important to leave to professional educators. Let me add that calculators have a pernicious effect on students in K-12. Calculators are used to avoid thinking and understanding; they should be banned in K-12. Oscar W. Greenberg Professor of Physics University of Maryland Here is the statement that we three faculty members have worked on and polished during the past couple of weeks. Our computer word counter says that there are 245 words in the text (not including our names at the end). STATEMENT The most evident problem with the mathematics preparation of students entering the University of Maryland is inadequacy of algebra skills and understanding. This forces many entering students into non-credit-bearing remedial mathematics courses and leaves others poorly prepared for advanced courses. Success is threatened, degree options are constrained, and graduations are delayed. We offer five suggestions for the state to consider. 1. Give proper emphasis to a K-12 goal of good algebra skills and understanding. These tools, and the mathematical literacy that accompanies them, are essential for further training. Rote procedures are easily forgotten and misused. Students must be capable with mathematical procedures. An understanding of the concepts relating to those procedures serves as a foundation for success in college mathematics. 2. Require students to achieve good mastery of a subject before moving on, and do not push students ahead prematurely. 3. Use calculators with restraint in K-12. Strong arithmetic and by-hand skills are the foundation for good algebra and they are important in later courses. Calculators can be very useful, but should not be regarded as making hand calculation unimportant. 4. Require that students take a mathematics course in each year of K-12. Several Maryland counties have already adopted this policy in recognition of the profound benefits of continuous mathematics training. 5. Provide homework grading help for K-12 teachers, following the example of Texas. Homework practice is essential to learning, and graded homework enhances learning. However, overworked mathematics teachers find it difficult to grade homework adequately. Denny Gulick, Professor of Mathematics, Michael Boyle, Professor of Mathematics, Frances Gulick, Lecturer in Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park All 3 are faculty with long-standing commitment to freshman mathematics courses at the University of Maryland, College Park. Many college students have not mastered published middle school principles much less high school things. It is like teachers must promote a certain number of students to college in order to keep their jobs. If too many students fail, then the system will fail the unproductive teacher. Nevertheless, employers still assume education as the first step of a weeding out process. They then rely on evaluations and recommendations to weed out those who do not fit. Whatever that means, it does not involve "scientific testing" but human judgement. Education and experience are important subjects. Often, education is shifted from teaching students to gaining benefits and being promoted. These personal wants do not have to affect student performance. These things make instruction less stressful. Honestly though, I feel as if there are still teachers who believe in education. John Dewey wrote for the Kappa Delta Pi lecture series in 1938, The history of education theory is marked by opposition between the idea that education is development from within and that it is formation from without: that it is based upon natural endowments and that education is a process of overcoming natural inclination and substituting in its place habits acquired under external pressure. So for me, many things have not changed. More students are getting the opportunity to go to school and more students do not care about educations. The issue is still morality. And so for all, teachers need to study so that they can offer the best to the students. Gregory Kent Haynes Professor of Chemistry Morgan State University I have been a professor of physics at the University of Maryland, College Park, since 1988. I have taught first, second, and third semester physics to engineering, math, computer science, astronomy and physics majors, as well as a few others. Generally speaking the student's preparation in math and physics is poor. It is certainly not getting better, and may be getting worse, though of that I'm not sure. I am not so concerned about the physics preparation, since we expect to teach that from scratch. I find the poor math preparation quite disturbing however, and I constantly hear from my colleagues similar comments. Some common deficiencies I've noticed in basic math skills: 1. Students typically cannot sketch a curve given its functional form. 2. Simple algebra is arduous and often produces errors. Slightly complicated algebra is prohibitively difficult. 3. The concept of ratio seems not to be fully internalized. 4. Approximations are foreign. 5. Trigonometry is shaky. I am not sure what the source of the problem is, but I suspect one culprit is the heavy use of calculators. I think calculators should be banned from large parts of the math curriculum. I am not familiar with the local high schools, but from what I've seen of my children's experience in the elementary and middleschools, there are further problems: the teachers do not understand the material very well, there is not enough focused instruction and feedback, and there are not enough exercises. A shining exception is the 6th grade IM math instruction. Theodore A. Jacobson Professor of Physics University of Maryland, College Park I am teaching a course on light, photography, and visual phenomena for non-science major at U. Maryland, College Park. I was very surprised to learn that some freshman students have never taken a physics course in high school. This situation must be changed. In many other countries in the world, all students are required to take physics courses starting in the middle school. I don't think I need to argue why physics is important, except by quoting physics is the crown of all sciences. This is not an exaggeration. In this modern age, almost all technological advances rely on some fundamental understanding in physics. I hope the future curriculum in high school includes at least two semesters of physics courses which are tailored for students with different career goals in the future. Xiangdong Ji Professor of Physics University of Maryland, College Park I feel that there are two major problems that prevent sufficient numbers of good math and science teachers from teaching in Maryland. First and most important is that working conditions in so many schools are poor. High numbers of students per teacher, lack of discipline, and too many non-classroom assignments contribute to this. Secondly, schools are not required to hire the most qualified teachers. Women and minorities often get jobs more easily than white males. Ten years ago I was certified in Maryland to teach Chemistry and Physical science. I was told that my credentials were very good, but I was not hired by any of the 4 systems I interviewed with over 2 years. (on the Eastern Shore) I have been teaching labs and a few lectures at Salisbury University ever since. David Kanarr Lecturer in Physics Salisbury University Since I began teaching at UMBC in 1996, I have had the opportunity to teach students of all levels, from freshmen to graduate students. I watch the freshmen experience shell shock af- ter their first exam, lacking fundamental survival and study skills. As an unfortunate solution, many of these bright students opt to change their major. As educators, we must learn how to teach these students to survive and succeed, rather than just giving up. I think the adequacy of high school preparation in Chemistry has remained a constant and possesses some serious flaws. First of all, high school teachers must realize that the physical sciences cannot be learned by rote memorization. I tell my students that Chemistry is a trade, in much the same way as carpentry and plumbing: its not hard once you learn it, and it cant be learned just be reading a book, only through lots of practice. Students lack fundamental problem solving skills. More importantly, theyre so used to providing that 10 significant figure number they just extracted from their calculator that they dont understand what the number really means. As I watch students become juniors and seniors, major deficiencies in students written technical communication skills are realized. For example, many students will provide a lengthy dissertation to answer a simple exam question, while not answering the question. Clear, logical, and concise technical writing skills must be taught through activities in science classes, just as they are in English and history class. Lisa A. Kelly Associate Professor of Chemistry University of Maryland, Baltimore County It has been more than twenty years since I taught physics to freshmen (at Penn), but for the last several years I have been active in the national K-16 movement, whose goal is bringing the performance of all American students up to international standards in all fields, including math and science. This is a daunting task because we have so far to go. A steady drumfire of reports hammers home the fact that, in all fields, including math and science, American elementary students perform comparably with their peers in other developed nations, but steadily fall behind as they move through the grades. By the end of high school, theyre at the back of the pack. In my view, this problem has two major sources, both contained in the observation that students cannot be expected to learn what they are not taught. If they dont take math and sci-ence courses, for whatever reason, we should not be surprised if they are innumerate and scientifically illiterate. And if they do take math and science courses, but their teachers are unqualified to teach their subject (e.g., because they never studied it in college), we should expect the same result. The solution? In essence, it is to require that all high school students take challenging math and science courses taught by fully qualified math and science teachers who are treated, paid, and expected to perform like real professionals. Donald N. Langenberg Chancellor Emeritus of the University System of Maryland Regents Professor of Education K-16, and Professor of Physics and Electrical Engineering University of Maryland, College Park There are many highly qualified and dedicated high school science teachers, teachers who are committed to their science and to imparting the best of modern science to their students. I became acquainted with many of these committed teachers during the ten years we ran the Summer Biology Institutes in the College of Life Sciences at the University of Maryland. Over 200 teachers from Maryland, Virginia and DC attended SBI during this time. They ranged from individuals who had strong backgrounds in science to those who were not so well prepared. What was universal was their desire to improve their knowledge of science and their commitment as teachers. They were all well aware of the difficult situation they were in, teachers in a rapidly moving field who needed continued pro- fessional development opportunities to stay abreast of these developments. This situation was particularly difficult in the science rich Washington DC area where many of the students participate in research programs in national labs or have parents who are scientists. In Maryland as in many other states, teachers are required to get either an advanced degree or the equivalent in graduate credits to maintain their credentials. What we heard from those teachers was that graduate programs offered by the colleges of education did not fit their needs; they were largely oriented towards pedagogy. They found that science programs in universities were largely oriented towards preparation for re-search and also inappropriate to their needs. Perhaps as important as the latter two factors were was access. Science teachers are geographically situated near their students and most are not in easy reach of a college campus. In addition teachers have family and other commitments that impose on their ability to participate in all but the most convenient programs. These teachers pleaded for us to start a content oriented masters program designed to fit their needs. In 2000 we proposed the Masters of Life Sciences program. The program was approved in August 2000 and developed and tested during the 2001- 2002 academic year. The MLFSC is a 30 credit asynchronous on line masters program. Students are admitted on the basis of performance on an admission exam or by passing a gateway course. The curriculum was designed to fit the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Science Teacher Standards and includes components of lab work, group and individual projects, independent research, original science literature and interdisciplinary relationships. The program has areas of concentration in chemistry and biology. Typical courses include: LFSC 610 Natural Products Chemistry LFSC 655 The Chemistry and Application of Electrochemical Cells LFSC 680 Chemical Ecology LFSC 620 Modern Molecular Genetics LFSC 660 Biodiversity and Conservation Biology LFSC 665 Ecology and Global Change LFSC 640 Human Physiology LFSC 645 Immunology LFSC 609A Food Safety and Genetically Modified Foods LFSC 609B Human Reproductive Biology The capstone experience in the program is a scholarly paper written in cooperation with a faculty mentor. The program appears to fit the needs of our science teachers. The MLFSC program became a partner in the National Teachers Association Professional Development Institute last spring. A year after our shake down period we have 122 students from 32 states and four foreign countries. You will note that I have not commented on undergraduate training of science teachers only their professional development opportunities. It is clear to me that our teachers need more than the classic summer institutes to keep current. Many more efforts like the MLFSC program are required to meet the needs of our practicing teachers. Paul Mazzocchi Emeritus Professor of Chemistry & Biochemistry Director, Master of Life Sciences Program University of Maryland,College Park Mathematics preparation for college-level study among graduates of Maryland public high schools has been poor for many years but is getting worse. I do not wish to give a list of anecdotal horror-stories, but I have noted students who claim to have gotten As and Bs in high- school algebra and even pre- calculus who appear never to have even *seen* a real algebra problem (one involving symbolic manipulation). Students come unprepared for the simple arithmetic word problems of freshman Chemistry, a course which uses no college-level math. A shocking percentage of students who wish to go further in science and engineering fields which require the learning of calculus must take remedial high-school algebra courses before even beginning first-semester calculus, although this group is self-selected as wishing to pursue careers in quantitative science. Maryland schools should halt the gradual dumbing down of their math curricula and institute real standards, such as the California state standards . If qualified math teachers are not available, one part of the solution is salary incentives - including substantial salary increments for math majors or those science and engineering majors whose curricula require a considerable number of post- calculus math courses. Why should Maryland slip still further behind? Thomas J. Murphy Professor of Chemistry University of Maryland, College Park There are two noticeable problems that some of my freshman students have are these: 1Poor study skills and unwillingness to take responsibility for their own learning. 2A lack of skill in problem solving and a desire to reduce a mathematics course to a catalog of algorithms. I dont feel that I have enough knowledge of the problem of recruiting qualified math and science teachers in public high schools. There are, perhaps, two ways for this to happen. One is that teachers hired are qualified, but not abundant. The other is that teachers hired are not adequately qualified and such teachers may or many not be in abundance. My sense of this situation is that we are now seeing the product of years of grade inflation that was, perhaps, so prevalent that the teachers themselves were led to think that they understood the subject matter, but never really mastered it. There is tendency, I believe, for the educational curriculum to pay more attention to lesson planning and far too little attention to mastering the material. Its impossible to effectively teach that which one doesn't understand. In such a case, one can only present the information and hope that the students, by virtue of books, tutors, parents, colleagues, or their own brilliance will learn what the teacher failed to learn. John Ondov Professor of Chemistry University of Maryland, College Park I am certainly no expert, but as one who has taught freshman calculus at the University of Maryland in College Park for several years, both in large lectures and in small honors classes, I may as well chip in with a few points: It's a cliche, but a large number of students are not ready to do well in college math. Term after term, in excess of 40 percent of students who enroll in Calculus I either withdraw, fail, or get a D. About another 30 percent get a C, which really only leaves them at risk in their next science/engineering/business course. And these were the better students. A large majority of math instruction on campus is precalculusmath that was supposed to be learned in high school but wasnt. I dont know if things were ever different in the past. People do not really appreciate the pervasiveness of math in society. This goes equally for students, teachers, and university math professors. Recently I served as acting director of our graduate Interdisciplinary Program in Applied Mathematics. Meeting faculty in departments all over campus, I was surprised to find many many, in engineering and science but also business, biological and social sciences, who are de facto mathematicians. The need for and use of sophisticated quantitative understanding is all over the place. I am not in favor of overdosing students on real world examples, but there is a problem in that too many word problems in algebra (and calculus!) textbooks are obviously meaningless. Two years ago I had a student who arrived a week into the semester from West Africa, who had somehow developed the need to really understand things. Despite all the obstacles,he succeeded to learn calculus, deeply. That need, that desire,is what seems to characterize students who do well. I don't know how to teach that quality of motivation, which is not widespread in society. I believe, however, that it is the most important thing. I have huge sympathy for secondary school teachers. They dont have enough time to think about their subject or to prepare to teach it better. The real scoop is seldom in textbooks. They deserve more support. Robert Pego Professor of Mathematics University of Maryland, College Park While I am a new member of the faculty at UMD, I have yet to teach an undergraduate course that would give me a perspective on the preparation of students arriving from the Maryland public schools. I do have some experience with students coming through special programs in Montgomery County. The preparation of students I know in the Science and Math program at Blair, and in the IB program at Richard Montgomery is excellent Maintaining, strengthening and expanding such programs would be one step in improving the math and science preparation of our students. William D. Phillips Distinguished University Professor of Physics University of Maryland, College Park I feel that many students who come from neighboring states which have regents exams and staggered school terms, such as PA, NJ, NY, and some foreign countries which administer A and O level exams have better verbal and quantitative skills. In many cases, foreign students are admitted to Maryland colleges and universities after failing exams which would admit them to college in their country of origin. The practice of teaching to the exam, and other ways of short circuiting the Maryland math and reading competency exams are counterproductive. I feel that the opposition of teachers unions to qualifying exams for teachers hasthe same effect. If better quality control over the teaching and learning process was maintained in Maryland high schools instead of the system in effect now, local school boards would be forced to solve the problems of uneven preparation of students and low teacher salaries. The way the system is set up now, local politics is allowed to influence too many decisions about good classroom practice. Jack P. Pinion Professor of Chemistry University of Maryland, Eastern Shore First of all, let me introduce myself. I have Ph.D. in math and physics, and have more than 20 years teaching experience of these subjects in former Soviet Union and more than 5 years in the USA. Besides, I carry out research in areas of applied math (applications in physics, engineering, and statistics), math modeling, differential equations. I have more than 150 papers and about 40 inventions in these areas. I was the advisor for more than 20 recipients for Master and Doctorate degrees in applied math area. Now, about your question. This question is not for 250 words. If shortly to improve the situation in math and science education we need: 1. Improve the preparation of school teachers and college instructors 1.1. Increase number of hours for lessons Methods of math education. Instructors must know not only math rules but give easy explanation of these rules. 1.2. Increase number of hours of teaching practice tice. I think that during study at university a student must have about one-half year teaching practice real teaching at a school with real-lifesituations, conflicts, and etc. 2. Improve math and science textbooks. Textbooks contain too much not necessary information, and do not have some requiring data. As a result, students have problems with SAT tests, with university math programs. As a result, each university has to offer special additional preparation courses, like elementary and intermediate algebra, fund of math and so on. 3. Decrease number of students in classroom. To receive positive result we need teach math or science for classes with not more than 25-30 students. 4.From middle school separate science by several subjects: physics, biology, and chemistry. I think that, in common case, teacher with major university education in physics cannot be a good teacher of biology, and, in opposite, teacher with major biology education cannot teach physics. Aron Reznik Professor of Physics Morgan State University Many of my colleagues are of the impression that the math preparationof Maryland high school students is getting worse and worse. My own view is that the situation is more complicated, and there is perhaps an increasing gap between students from the best schools and those from average programs. There are a few success stories. For example, the science magnet program at Blair High School in Silver Spring last year produced more finalists in the Intel Science Talent Search than any other school in the nation. But there is no doubt that many students are entering college with poor study skills and work habits and weakness in simple algebra and arithmetic. Such students usually have no chance for success in science and math in college. It also seems that in spite of the increasing importance of science to everyday life, fewer students than before appreciate the excitement of a career in math, science, or science education. Jonathan M. Rosenberg Professor of Mathematics and Associate Chair for Graduate Studies University of Maryland, College Park The following is our response to your inquiry regarding high school preparation. We hope this will be helpful. As faculty members of the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department at UMBC, we have found a continuing increase in the quality and preparation of the students as shown by both their entry SAT scores and performance in our introductory chemistry classes. We have also seen a marked increase in mathematical literacy which has allowed spending more time on chemistry and less on mere mathematical manipulations. The concept of logs is still too often missing and the ability to estimate numbers is still often lacking. In addition, we feel that more preparation in word problems would be useful as this would increase general reading comprehension and problem-solving skills in our, and other scientific disciplines, Students need to realize that all of science is based on assumptions and models (mathematical, pictorial, physical)and that as the student evolves in his/her education, as the field advances, the models evolve as well. High price calculators and computers do not assuage the problemindeed the use of visualization and plausibility arguments need to be encouraged even more as obtaining correct numerical results becomes easier and faster with continual improvements in technology and our continually improving student body. Suzanne F.Rottman Director, Chemistry Tutorial Center Joel F.Liebman Professor of Chemistry and Member, University Honors Advisory Council University of Maryland, Baltimore County The text below is in response to your request for comments on science and math education. I have been involved in physics education and worked with high school teachers and students in both my native Hungary and in the US. Building teacher self-confidence always worked better than demeaning emphasis on accountability. My opinion may be off the main trend, but I let you have it regardless. Of course, this subject requires much more than 250 words, but I hope that the main point is clear. Accountability of teachers and schools is often considered the key to improving education. It leads to rigorous testing programs that make the accurate measurement of progress possible. I want to point out that excessive emphasis on testing can be counterproductive. Most teachers educate their students according to the best of their ability. For them, accountability means lack of trust and respect. Financial incentives cannot compensate for that. In order to meet standards, math teachers prepare their students for the next test, rather than teaching them mathematics. They try to prove themselves instead of conveying the excitement of their subject. They coach students in test preparation techniques in order to improve their scores on multiple choice tests. At the same time, some essential skills remain neglected. Let me mention two important ones that hamper progress on the college level: 1. Reading the text of a problem carefully, interpreting it accurately and translating it into mathematical formalism. This is very different from identifying the main idea quickly in order to select the most probable answer or eliminate the less likely ones. 2. Solving complex problems that require several steps and perhaps the combination of several ideas.The key to creative problem solving is analysis and synthesis, alternating between details and the big picture. Complex problems are not suitable for multiple choice tests, consequently they receive insufficient emphasis. The quality of teachers could benefit from efficient mentoring programs, mutual class visits, and teacher-researcher partnerships. More emphasis on accountability can only hurt. Laszlo Takacs Associate Professor of Physics University of Maryland, Baltimore County This is my response to your request about my opinion on the preparation of high school math students interested in physical sciences. My general impression is that most of the students entering the university are not adequately prepared in mathematics. In particular most of them lack the ability to think in abstract terms. This is very necessary for doing quantitative work in chemistry, physics, and now a days biology as well. In general the level of preparation is getting worse and this is a cause for concern. It is my opinion that students in advanced elementary schools (grade 5) and certainly in middle schools should progress in terms of thinking about problems using abstraction of concrete problems. For example, instead of repeatedly solving linear equations and quadratic equations for given set of coefficients one should be taught methods to derive the general equations. This can follow after repeatedly solving many concrete problems. Another thing that is needed to insist on solving many related problems so that the concepts are fully integrated in the thinking of the students. Finally, it will be helpful to see how elementary mathematical ideas find applications in physical sciences. For example the Newtons equation for particles falling feeling freely under gravity is expressible as linear equation. Many such examples exist. Such illustrations show that mathematics is not an isolated subject but the concepts find applications in describing many natural phenomena. Finally, just as hitting a fifteen foot jump shot in basketball once does not make a person learn the mechanics of shooting neither will doing a problem to illustrate one concept sufficient. Repetition is the key. D. Thirumalai Professor, IPST University of Maryland, College Park, Please excuse my delay in responding to your request below for a brief summary of my views on the state of mathematics and science education; my response is as follows: Some improvements have been made in the teaching of math and science in schools; I am particularly familiar with the PSSC improvements in Physics but realize there have been similar changes in other disciplines. However, I hope some group and charter schools will undertake a massive reorganization and reform that will emphasize the following points: 1. Above all we need good teachers at every level .Yet brilliant persons in science and mathematics have many other, more lucrative opportunities than teaching. Therefore we must offer special enhancements for good teachers of math and sci-ence, substantially above those offered for teaching in other fields. Public School systems should encourage salary variations based on merit. 2. Mathematics and science should be taught to students every year of junior high school and high school, with gradually increasing complexity and sophistication. The present system of one year of biology, then one of chemistry, then one of physics does not recognize the unity of science and means that most students forget much of science and never get to physics, which in principle is the simplest and most fundamental of the sciences. We need a logically developed science curriculum that is fun and shows the intercon-nections, repeatedly returning to each discipline with gradually increasing sophistication and mathematical understanding. By repetition with increasing complexity students learn to remember math and science and see the increasing power and beauty. 3. Computers and computer assisted learning should be used in all courses, which permits variation of the material presented in accordance with each students needs. Classes should be grouped in accordance with ability and progress, and individualized instruction given where needed. There is much more to say, but I have reached my limit of 250 words! Good luck in your important effort. John Toll Chancellor Emeritus and Professor of Physics University of Maryland, College Park and President, Washington College I think the problem of not understanding mathematics starts from the middle grade.if arithmetic foundation is weak, definitely algebra will be weak. My suggestion is do not pass the kids when they are failing the basic arithmetic problems. Stop the social promotion. It is damaging to the kids. On the hand, the system needs qualified mathematics teachers to teach the kids. An English teacher can not teach arithmetic the way the mathematics teacher will. Hopefully this will help you in your publication. Ojiabo Ukoha Professor of Mathematics University of Maryland, Eastern Shore I apologize for not focusing on science per se, because I think the problems with science education are not separate from the general problems. And I know you will get comments about constructivist teaching and upgrade of facilities from others. First, let me say that my credentials for giving opinions are pretty marginal. I have no children in the school system and I do not teach or work with teenagers or children. BUT, as a college professor at a local institution, I get the students after the school system has finished with them, and I can see what is causing them to fail. In addition I have friends who teach in the area high schools and know a little about what they are going through. College students today (and this has become much worse in the last few years) have no conception that it takes any effort to learn. I did a brief survey of students in my chemistry course (at least the 4th semester of college chemistry for them), and found that half of them were putting less time into preparation and studying for the lecture part of the course than I was! They have not the foggiest idea that studying (work!) is necessary, nor how to go about doing it. Since this is not a new problem, I should tell you that I spend about an hour near the beginning of each semester talking about study methods, reviewing study techniques specific for this course, effective use of text-book problems and old exams (yes, I give them copies of last year's exams), note-taking, etc. They do know how to study, at least in principle it just hasn't crossed their minds to actually do the work. The successful students used the tricks and techniques I had suggested and developed their own, and consulted with me about their methods. The unsuccessful students wanted answers to the old exams before they would try them (there are answers for all the problems in the text). The other major problem with student attitudes is that no matter how much you remind the students that knowledge builds, and that what they learn this semester will depend on what they learned last semester, they assign everything in school to short term memory. I do believe that many consider education, their degree, to be for the certificate, not for the content of what they learn. Many really don't believe they need to know this stuff to succeed in their chosen field, as long as they have their degree. I exaggerate, but not much. Since I seldom teach students who are fresh from high school, I cannot evaluate what they know. But I suspect that many suffer from the same inability to take any responsibility for their own learning that I described above. They took high school chemistry (not required for our freshman chemistry courses) and once they passed the course, they dumped the information. Even worse, they dumped the algebra and cannot do simple operations and deal with word problems. When I see them in the third semester of chemistry, many cannot calculate percent correctly (to give them some credit, the percent is for a chemical reaction so it is a little more complex). My conclusions from these observations and from talking to the kids: Problem one may be at home. Parents, instead of demanding that their children do their absolute best at every task, are demanding that the school system go easy on them. The students are never challenged in any way at home or at school. The number of children with behavioral problems has sky-rocketed. I do not believe that most of these children are learning disabled they are just spoiled brats whose parents were too lazy or too cowardly to teach them to behave in a complex, crowded society. Kids are killing each other because they think someone disced them. I swear that some of these children never get past that stage of development where they recognize that other human beings have feelings, ideas and rights that have equal value to their own (or at least have an equal right to exist). Their social growth is stunted. These attitudes are muted at the college level, but I can tell you that students do not blame their lack of studying for their failure, they blame the teacher. In the last few years these attitudes have permeated the students to a new level what happened in the school system and society to graduate so many of these maladapted folks starting about 1999 or 2000? Problem two. The school system likes that go easy approach, because it means they can pass undeserving students and thus improve their statistics. I could not believe that the Baltimore City Schools decided to pass everyone, even if they hadn't learned anything. When I was a student, there were rebels, and there were kids with ATTITUDE, and if they failed, they failed. It was hard to have older, more dangerous kids in the classes, but they left when they were 16 anyway. But I can guarantee you they could all read when they did! Now, they are carried along as if they knew something. They take excessive amounts of teacher time because they act up (or out) instead of trying to learn, so that their classmates who may want to learn are deprived. No -one is willing to risk injuring the psyches of the little darlings by saying you failed. When are they going to learn that 1) not everyone can succeed at everything and 2) hard work pays off? Why is this happening? Political pressure from parents who want a passing grade next to their hooligan's name, from government, with a mandate to provide special education for hyperactive and other disabled children, from the kids, who have learned that whining works because no one wants to listen to it. Problem three. School systems have incorrectly identified the problem with the schools as a curriculum problem. I don't think it is. Fine tuning might be necessary. For example, the same chemistry being taught every year with a little more detail teach it once and insist that they remember because the next course depends on it. Then teach them something about the chemistry in the world around them. Get them curious. The major curriculum problem is that the school system changes the curriculum and the standardized tests every couple of years, making it impossible for the teachers to develop the materials and methods to fit these demands. The old-fashioned curriculum with updates every year to ensure that current events don't stop where the textbook does. Problem four. What problems do the schools have? Physical facilities are pitiful in most cases (except for a few magnet schools). Science classes poor facilities can hamper education and be downright unsafe; and teachers need access to basic equipment and updated safety training. Staff support is equally pitiful. Let me give you an example: about 5 of the biggest City high schools opened a couple of years ago with no schedules for the students and no locker or class assignments. Such chaos and poor management does not provide much of a model for the students for what it means to be a professional. I am not blaming this on any individual staff members, but on the overall system managers, who did not train the school managers to do this (it should have been done in the spring) and/or pay them for the hours in the summer to accomplish the task. There is too much political interference with content can't teach the foundations of biology (evolution), can't teach contraception, AIDS prevention. With regard to curriculum, the school systems have too few curriculum specialists to help the teachers by providing enrichment opportunities, arranging field trips, helping with the purchasing and other problems with the bureaucracy, etc; this summer the science and health specialist for the City was fired, apparently because they could not see a need for her services. Without her, morale and intellectual development among the City's science and health teachers will drop significantly and their teaching will suffer. What about the teachers? Those that I have met are dedicated to the children and to the subjects they teach. They take advantage of professional days to learn new content and methods, and they try new things in the classroom all the time. They work their butts off trying to engage the students. Not all teachers are that dedicated. But the union protects the deadbeats, perhaps a little too much. Apparently in Baltimore County, a teacher who was rated unsatisfactory could not be transferred, so if you wanted to get a bad teacher out of your school, you had to rate them satisfactory. So the same unwillingness to come to grips with failure and do something about it affects the evaluation of teachers. And remember that it will only get worse as the recent crop of students I described above will be the teachers of tomorrow. Class size too is a problem, especially with the high concentration of troublemakers. Teacher salaries could be better, but salary increases need to be combined with replacement of non-productive teachers with productive ones, even if it means hiring someone with less that the full teaching credentials to do the job. For science teachers, the salary is a big issue. With the possible exception of Biology majors, all of our graduates can get jobs in science where they are paid more for less work; these jobs are 9-5 if that is what they want they don't have to spend every evening grading and preparing. Moreover, most of these other jobs will provide support for continuing education. Several of my former students became teachers after working in industry (ideal to have someone with real world experience with science in the classroom but it took 3 years or so of evening classes to become qualified. Surely the school system could make it easier for these folks. Many of these problems cannot be solved without money (but of course the right leader is need for the money to be used effectively). Get the science teachers and the principals of the schools to itemize and prioritize their needs and see how big the problem is. Give bonuses to the excellent teachers. I understand some systems are giving signing bonuses. If there is a shortage of science teachers, develop a bonus system. How do you stop the downward slide? I think it will take toughness, a willingness to set standards (not necessarily a specific test, as that seems to have a poor outcome) and stick to them. Most teachers understand standards as they had to meet them in college. What needs to happen is that the principals have to support the teachers and the school district administrators have to support the principals. None of these people can govern at a distance. People like the science supervisor mentioned above, who visits the schools and knows who is doing a great job and who is coasting provide the interface that is needed. If we don't demand excellence of our children, I fear for the future of this country, and the world you've seen the change in attitude of people in public service jobs. Our society is becoming increasingly polarized economically, racially, etc.as those who learn how to work and take responsibility do well and leave the coasters with nothing to do but complain that they did not get their share. It is no wonder that students from small backward countries are beating ours in international competition. I should say something good about the school system. The dedicated teachers in every school are reaching out to individual kids and providing them a chance to succeed, to be excellent and to become a professional. I see examples every semester of kids from backgrounds where getting a college education was as likely as growing horns. They struggle (and whine too) and most of them make it. So there is a stealth school system inside this chaos that is really working for some kids. And I believe it is because some teacher(s) saw potential and worked with these students until they began to develop and learn independently. P.S. Just to give you some idea of where my attitudes come from . . . I would be considered politically VERY liberal, especially in todays political climate. P.P.S. While I don't mind your using my comments verbatim, I am concerned that you did not say whether my name would be attached. You do not have my permission to use my name in the printed version . I just dont want to be harassed. (Name Withheld by Request) Professor of Science Baltimore Area public university Sponsorship The Calvert Institute is indebted for the sponsorship of this study and this issue of the Calvert Report to grants from the following: The Abell Foundation Douglas Hamilton Richard E. Hug Published by the Calvert Institute for Policy Research 8 West Hamilton Street Baltimore, MD 21201 Tel: (410) 662-7252 Fax: (410) 539-2973 Web:www.calvertinstitute.org E-mail: info@CalvertInstitute.org Board of Directors: Christopher R. West,President Carol R. Hirschburg, Secretary David R. Blumberg Joseph Brown, Sr. Trent M. Kittleman George W. Liebmann; Robert M. McCarthy Robert F. Scholz David F. Tufaro K. Jane Williams-Ward George W. Liebmann, Executive Director