Vol. 41, No. 3, July 2012
Printer friendly version of Newsletter
CRS Examines STEM Funding at NSF
(Published with permission. "COSSA Washington UPDATE," April 16, 2012, Volume 31, Issue 7)
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), which issues reports to inform Members of the U.S. Congress about federal programs and the choices that they need to make, has taken on the issue of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) education at the National Science Foundation (NSF). The report was written by Heather Gonzalez, a CRS specialist in science and technology policy.
Quick Links....
News from the Profession
------------------------------------
Past Conferences
------------------------------------
Upcoming Conferences
------------------------------------
Member News
------------------------------------
How History of Science and Technology Can Forge Marketing Careers
------------------------------------
Writing Outside the Academic Box
------------------------------------
Photo 51—A Recent Addition
to History-of-Science-Inspired Theatre
------------------------------------
CRS Examines STEM Funding
at NSF
------------------------------------
OSTP Issues Progress Report on Public Access to
Scholarly Publications
------------------------------------
Recent Developments in
Big History
------------------------------------
Blogging, Tweeting, and Other Digital Activities
The document notes that the federal government has established a wide-ranging STEM education effort. In December 2011, an inventory by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy found 252 STEM education "investments" totaling $3.4 billion in FY 2010 across 13 federal agencies. Federal STEM education funding is concentrated at three federal agencies-the National Science Foundation (NSF or the Foundation), the Department of Education (ED), and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Of these the NSF, the report indicates, has the most STEM education funding and largest number of programs.
Despite this, CRS points out that education funding at the Foundation has decreased as a percentage of the total NSF budget since FY 2003. These changes appear to result from a combination of holding the main education account more-or-less constant while applying most of the Foundation's FY 2003–FY 2011 budget growth to the main research account. However, in constant dollar terms, it appears that at least some of the increase in funding for research activities during the observed period may have come at the expense of education activities. Further, Congress reduced enacted funding levels for the Foundation's main education account in both FY 2011 and FY 2012.
CRS suggests that "It is not clear if these funding changes reflect evolving congressional and Administration policy priorities and an intentional prioritization of research over educational activities at the NSF or if they reflect the cumulative impact of funding decisions made in response to specific conditions in specific fiscal years that happen to have had this effect."
According to the report, the policy rationale for NSF involvement in STEM education is "their perceived impact on the U.S. Science and Engineering (S&E) workforce-and through it, on U.S. economic competitiveness and national security." Many academic and business leaders have argued that STEM educational weaknesses will lead to a diminished science and engineering workforce that will challenge U.S. economic prowess. Others argue that perceived limitations in the U.S. S&E workforce are overstated and that U.S. competitiveness is not threatened. A third view holds that perceptions of S&E workforce shortages are accurate if the increasing numbers of jobs that are technically non-STEM, but that require STEM competencies (e.g., analytical skills), are included in labor-demand calculations.
NSF's role in STEM education includes research on teaching and learning and improving teaching and retention of students in STEM subjects at both the K-12 and undergraduate education levels. The dissemination of NSF's STEM education research, including research evaluating the effectiveness of NSF STEM education programs, to other federal agencies and education stakeholders is an ongoing policy challenge, the report suggests. Some policymakers have responded to this challenge by seeking improved collaboration between federal agencies at both the portfolio and program levels, including sharing evidence-based approaches as a primary strategy toward accomplishing federal STEM education goals. At the program level, the Administration's FY 2013 budget request seeks funding for three STEM education collaborations between NSF and ED.
CRS tells Congress it has a number of options regarding STEM funding at NSF and across the government. It can decrease funding for STEM activities across the government; a Government Accountability Office report claiming duplication and redundancies across federal agencies has helped fuel this option. Another avenue is to reduce NSF's role and increase other agencies', particularly the Department of Education. And there is the simple option to increase, decrease, or keep the same budgets for STEM at NSF as we move forward.
The report concludes: "As Congress weighs these various options in the context of the FY 2013 appropriations process, it may be useful to consider the short, medium, and long-term impact of congressional funding choices on the entire federal STEM education portfolio, on the respective research and education missions of the NSF, and on the general policy purposes (e.g., advancement of the national STEM labor supply) these investments seek to serve. Congress may also wish to consider these investments in the context of a national STEM education strategy."