Archived Information

*Before It's Too Late*

A Report to the Nation from the National Commission

on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century

*Letter of Transmittal*

September 27, 2000

Richard W. Riley

Secretary of Education

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC 20202

Dear Secretary Riley:

On July 20, 1999---the 30th anniversary of the first landing on the
moon---you announced the appointment of the 25-member National
Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. In
your charge to the Commission and its eight ex officio members, you
asked us to investigate and report on the quality of mathematics and
science teaching in the nation, directing us to consider ways of
improving recruitment, preparation, retention, and professional growth
for mathematics and science teachers in K--12 classrooms nationwide. You
reminded us that, three decades after a historic achievement, "we need
to set the stage for advancement in mathematics and science for the next
thirty years."

It has been my privilege to chair the Commission, and I am pleased to
report to you, on behalf of its members, that we have completed our
work. With this letter, we transmit to you our report, *Before It's Too
Late*, which summarizes our findings. It presents to both the Department
of Education and the American people a set of ambitious goals for
improving mathematics and science teaching and specific action
strategies for achieving each of them.

We trust that we have been faithful to your charge. As we have listened
to the presentations of scholars, deliberated over the studies of
outstanding researchers, and attended to the experience of dedicated
administrators and teachers, we have learned much. Our assumptions have
been called into question. Our individual views have been tempered by
the perspectives of colleagues whose judgment we have come to respect,
even in disagreement. As we have sought to understand today's problems
in mathematics and science education, we have also worked to uphold a
constant vision of high-quality teaching as the irreducible minimum for
creating tomorrow's solutions.

We believe that the issues and concerns raised in our report can be
understood, addressed by, and potentially unite policymakers, teachers,
the business community, parents, students, and private citizens alike.
The goals and action strategies we suggest may be seen by some as too
great a reach, by some as not bold enough. We are convinced, however,
that if they are ignored, our children and our nation will soon pay the
high price that always accompanies apathy.

Each member of the Commission, through this letter, expresses
appreciation for your leadership in having brought this diverse group
together to examine an issue that has pivotal significance for our
country as we embark on a new century and millennium. It is our
collective and earnest hope that you will continue that leadership by
encouraging widespread discussion of our views and suggestions, and by
urging appropriate action based on our findings and recommendations.

Finally, we offer our profound thanks for having provided us with this
opportunity to serve our country---and our children---as members of this
Commission.

Respectfully,

John Glenn, Commission Chairman

*Commission Members*

John Glenn

Commission Chairman

Deborah Loewenberg Ball

Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Mathematics Education

and Teacher Education, University of Michigan

Craig R. Barrett

President and CEO, Intel Corporation

Diane J. Briars

Mathematics Director, Pittsburgh Public Schools

Cynthia Moore Chestnut

State Representative, Florida

Sandra Feldman

President, American Federation of Teachers

James E. Geringer

Governor, Wyoming

Javier Gonzalez

Mathematics Teacher, Pioneer High School (CA)

Jerilyn Grignon

Technology Instructor, Menominee Indian Junior High School (WI)

Jeffrey Himmelstein

Adjunct Professor of Biology, William Patterson University (NJ)

Rush Holt

U.S. Representative, New Jersey

James B. Hunt Jr.

Governor, North Carolina

James M. Jeffords

U.S. Senator, Vermont

Anne Jolly

Science Teacher/Professional Development Coordinator,

Cranford Burns Middle School (AL)

Nancy Keenan

Superintendent of Public Instruction,

Montana Office of Public Instruction

Edward M. Kennedy

U.S. Senator, Massachusetts

Paul Kimmelman

Superintendent, West Northfield School District No. 31 (IL)

William E. Kirwan

President, The Ohio State University

Maria Alicia Lopez-Freeman

Executive Director, California Science Project

Walter E. Massey

President, Morehouse College

Iris T. Metts

Superintendent, Prince George's County Public Schools (MD)

Connie Morella

U.S. Representative, Maryland

Edward B. Rust, Jr.

Chairman and CEO, State Farm Mutual

Automobile Insurance Company

Chang-Lin Tien

University Professor and NEC Distinguished

Professor of Engineering, University of California Berkeley

Dennis Van Roekel

Secretary-Treasurer, National Education Association

Richard W. Riley, U.S. Secretary of Education

Bruce Alberts

President, National Academy of Sciences

Rita R. Colwell

Director, National Science Foundation

Daniel S. Goldin

Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Neal Lane

Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Policy,

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Bill Richardson

U.S. Secretary of Energy

Rodney E. Slater

U.S. Secretary of Transportation

Jerome F. Smith, Jr.

Chancellor for Education and Professional Development,

U.S. Department of Defense

*Foreword*

John Glenn, Commission Chairman

This report makes only a few straightforward points, but it makes them
urgently and insistently.

First, at the daybreak of this new century and millennium, the
Commission is convinced that the future well-being of our nation and
people depends not just on how well we educate our children generally,
but on how well we educate them in mathematics and science specifically.

From mathematics and the sciences will come the products, services,
standard of living, and economic and military security that will sustain
us at home and around the world. From them will come the technological
creativity American companies need to compete effectively in the global
marketplace. "Globalization" has occurred. Economic theories of a few
years ago are now a reality. Goods, services, ideas, communication,
businesses, industries, finance, investment, and jobs---*the good
jobs*---are increasingly

the competitive currency of the inter-national marketplace.

Among the first things Americans watch every morning on TV is the global
marketplace at work. The quotes not only from Wall Street itself, but
also from the Nikkei, Hang Seng, and Hong Kong exchanges, followed in
turn by those of Frankfurt, Zurich, and London---along with reports on
the status of the yen, peso, and Euro---all reflect investment flows of
hundreds of billions in assets around the world. Times have changed. In
an integrated, global economy, whose key components are increasingly
knit together in an interdependent system of relationships, will our
children be able to compete?

Beyond the world of global finance, mathematics and science will also
supply the core forms of knowledge that the next generation of
innovators, producers, and workers in every country will need if they
are to solve the unforeseen problems and dream the dreams that will
define America's future.

Second, it is abundantly clear from the evidence already at hand that we
are not doing the job that we should do---or can do---in teaching our
children to understand and use ideas from these fields. Our children are
falling behind; they are simply not "world-class learners" when it comes
to mathematics and science.

The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) tested the
students of 41 nations. Children in the United States were among the
leaders in the fourth-grade assessment, but by high school graduation
they were *almost last*. Here at home, the National Assessment of
Educational Progress basically substantiates our students' poor
performance.

In short, our children are losing the ability to respond not just to the
challenges already presented by the 21st century but to its potential as
well. We are failing to capture the interest of our youth for scientific
and mathematical ideas. We are not instructing them to the level of
competence they will need to live their lives and work at their jobs
productively. Perhaps worst of all, we are not challenging their
imaginations deeply enough.

Third, after an extensive, in-depth review of what is happening in our
classrooms, the Commission has concluded that the most powerful
instrument for change, and therefore the place to begin, lies at the
very core of education---*with teaching itself*.

The teaching pool in mathematics and science is inadequate to meet our
current needs; many classes in these subjects are taught by unqualified
and underqualified teachers. Our inability to attract and keep good
teachers grows. As a result, newer, technologically oriented industries
are having trouble finding enough qualified employees from among those
teachers' students. Worse, creativity atrophies and innovation suffers.

We are of one mind in our belief that the way to interest children in
mathematics and science is through teachers who are not only
enthusiastic about their subjects, but who are also steeped in their
disciplines and who have the professional training---as teachers---to
teach those subjects well. Nor is this teacher training simply a matter
of preparation; it depends just as much---or even more---on sustained,
high-quality professional development.

Fourth, we believe that committing ourselves to reach three specific
goals can go far in bringing about the basic changes we need. These
goals go directly to issues of quality, quantity, and an enabling work
environment for teachers of mathematics and science. For each goal, we
offer specific action strategies for achieving that particular goal,
ideas on who should implement them, and how. Specifically, we offer
suggestions on how to:

• Establish an ongoing system to improve the quality of mathematics and
science teaching in

grades K--12;

• Increase significantly the number of mathematics and science teachers
and improve the quality of their preparation; and

• Improve the working environment and make the teaching profession more
attractive for K--12 mathematics and science teachers.

The goals we set before the American people in this report will not be
easily attained, nor will the action strategies we offer be readily
implemented. Most other nations have a national education system that
can change direction more rapidly than our K--12 system, which is
operated by nearly 16,000 independent school boards. Even when the
majority of board members are firmly dedicated to good education, it is
still a difficult job to change direction when needed.

The task to which we call the American people is therefore not an easy
one.

Nor will our goals be met at bargain-basement rates. But we believe we
have a well-focused view of the needs facing our country and its youth,
and that we have identified the right starting points for preparing them
to meet their future. We are just as strongly convinced that the
downstream cost of not turning this problem around will be exponentially
higher than the cost of beginning to solve it now.

But rising to great challenges is a part of our national character---not
only in such arduous deeds as breaking the bonds of the planet itself,
but in the daily work of equipping each new generation to meet new
responsibilities. The last time we turned a century, our schools rose to
the challenge of educating the nation's youth to meet the demands of an
industrializing economy. We succeeded in the equally formidable task of
integrating millions of immigrants from around the world into a dynamic
culture without precedent

in history.

Now history presents us with a yet more pressing demand. We are being
called upon to capitalize on the changes wrought by two great
revolutions: rapid economic globalization on the one hand and the
expansion of information-based technologies on the other. In this light,
we can take heart from American history's most profound lesson: Our
ability, as a people, to uncover the liberating opportunities concealed
within daunting tasks is what defines the American genius.

In the end, then, the message of this report is a simple one. The time
has come to move from the information and analysis we have gathered to
the resolution we need. We are summoned to answer a stark question. As
our children move toward the day when their decisions will be the ones
shaping a new America, will they be equipped with the mathematical and
scientific tools needed to meet those challenges and capitalize on those
opportunities?

These are our children, and the choice is ours. We know what we have to
do; the time is now---*before it's too late*.

\* \* \* \* \*

*The Commission sincerely appreciates the confidence that Secretary
Richard W. Riley placed in us, and hopes that our report is a worthy and
useful product in guiding our nation's students to world-class
performance.*

*Special thanks are due to our Executive Director, Linda P. Rosen, whose
lifelong experience in mathematics education was vital to our work, and
whose direction of the labors of the Commission through long hours on a
day-in, day-out, yearlong basis was exemplary and crucial to our work.*

*Executive Summary*

In an age now driven by the relentless necessity of scientific and
technological advance, the current preparation that students in the
United States receive in mathematics and science is, in a word,
unacceptable.

Recent reports of the performance of our country's students from both
the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) echo a dismal message
of lackluster performance, now three decades old; it's time the nation
heeded it---*before it's too late.*

Four important and enduring reasons underscore the need for our children
to achieve competency in mathematics and science: (1) the rapid pace of
change in both the increasingly interdependent global economy and in the
American workplace demands widespread mathematics- and science-related
knowledge and abilities; (2) our citizens need both mathematics and
science for their everyday decision-making;

\(3\) mathematics and science are inextricably linked to the nation's
security interests; and (4) the deeper, intrinsic value of mathematical
and scientific knowledge shapes and defines our common life, history,
and culture. Mathematics and science are primary sources of lifelong
learning and the progress of our civilization.

Beyond the disturbing news that our young people are not performing well
enough in mathematics and science to take firm command of their own
futures, five major factors have begun to coalesce that make this a
particularly opportune time to focus on strengthening mathematics and
science education: (1) reform efforts have sharply focused the attention
of the American people on education as a public issue; (2) the nation
now has a surplus of resources to invest in education; (3) a coming
demographic shift in the teaching force---two thirds of which will be
retiring in the next decade---offers an unparalleled chance to plan for
and make changes at the core of education itself; (4) our schools can
now put to work what educators have learned in the past generation about
curriculum, high standards, effective teaching, assessment, and how
children learn; and (5) the rising generation of college graduates is
once again showing an interest in teaching as a profession. The nation
must capitalize on the convergence of these factors to improve
mathematics and science teaching in the United States. We need to act
now, *before it's too late*.

The primary message of this report holds that America's students must
improve their performance in mathematics and science if they are to
succeed in today's world and if the United States is to stay competitive
in an integrated global economy. The Report's second message points in
the direction of a solution:

the most direct route to improving mathematics and science achievement
for all students is better mathematics and science teaching.

Evidence of the positive effect of better teaching is unequivocal;
indeed, the most consistent and powerful predictors of student
achievement in mathematics and science are full teaching certification
and a college major in the field being taught.

Better mathematics and science teaching is therefore grounded, first of
all, in improving the quality of teacher preparation and in making
continuing professional education available for all teachers. A closer
look at the teaching that goes on in mathematics and science classrooms
today puts the performance of U.S. students on national and
inter-national assessments in sharper focus.

The basic teaching style in too many mathematics and science classes
today remains essentially what it was two generations ago. By contrast,
teaching innovation and higher student performance are well documented
in other countries, where students' improvements are anchored to an
insistence on strong professional development for teachers.

What *could* be happening in U.S. mathematics and science classrooms is
markedly different. The report names an extensive set of characteristics
of "*high-quality* teaching." When they are focused through the lens of
exemplary teacher preparation and an integrated system of professional
development, an enormous potential for empowering teachers and improving
instruction is apparent.

The pressing national need for high-quality teaching described in this
report, therefore, demands a vigorous, national response that unifies
the efforts of all stakeholders in mathematics and science education. To
that end, three wide-ranging, intertwined goals focus the report's call
for action at local, state, and federal levels. As an aid to
implementation, each goal is accompanied by a coordinated set of
well-funded action strategies that identify key stakeholders who should
take the lead in implementing each strategy. The estimated annual cost
to achieve these action strategies is over \$5 billion. These funds and
other resources will come from a diversified set of sources, including
all levels of government, higher education, business and industry,
professional education associations and teachers' unions, community
groups, and the citizenry. The goals and action strategies set forth in
the report are as follows:

*Goal 1: Establish an ongoing system to improve the quality of
mathematics and science teaching in grades K --12.*

Seven interdependent action strategies are offered to implement this
system: (1) each state must immediately undertake a full needs
assessment to determine what teachers require, both in their schools and
their professional lives, if they are to routinely deliver high-quality
teaching; (2) Summer Institutes must be established to address the
professional development needs identified; (3) building- and
district-level Inquiry Groups can provide venues for teachers to engage
in common study to enrich their subject knowledge and teaching skills;
(4) Leadership Training is needed to prepare facilitators for the Summer
Institutes and Inquiry Groups; (5) a dedicated Internet Portal must be
available to teachers so they can make use of and contribute to an
ever-expanding knowledge base about mathematics and science teaching;
(6) a nongovernmental Coordinating Council is needed to bring together
the above initiatives and those that follow to assess accomplishments;
and (7) all states and local districts should initiate reward and
incentive programs, both to support exemplary professional development
that results in higher student achievement and to increase the
attractiveness of teaching as a profession.

*Goal 2: Increase significantly the number of mathematics and science
teachers and improve the quality of their preparation.* Three action
strategies are offered for this goal: (1) a direct strategy that
identifies exemplary models of teacher preparation whose success can be
widely replicated; (2) an overarching strategy of finding ways to
attract additional qualified candidates into teaching from among high
school and college students, recent college graduates, and people at
mid-career; and (3) creating 15 competitively selected Mathematics and
Science Teaching Academies to annually train 3,000 Academy Fellows, who
will be nationally recruited for a one-year, intensive course on
effective teaching methods in mathematics or science.

*Goal 3: Improve the working environment and make the teaching
profession more attractive for K--12 mathematics and science teachers.
Four action strategies address this goal:* (1) focused induction
programs are required to help acclimate beginning mathematics and
science teachers to the profession, create formal mentoring
relationships, and introduce teachers to Inquiry Groups; (2)
district/business partnerships are needed to provide support for a broad
range of efforts that can help create professional working environments
for teachers. These efforts can enhance teaching by providing materials,
facilities, equipment, and mentor stipends; (3) incentives---whether in
the form of cash awards, salary increases, support for further
education, or community-wide recognition---are needed to encourage
deserving mathematics and science teachers to remain in teaching and
improve their skills; and (4) 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 report concludes by challenging all Americans directly to take
personal responsibility for expressing their views on mathematics and
science education to policy- and decision-makers, and to take the
initiative to implement the report's action strategies in their own
communities.

*The Problem*

Our Students' Performance in Mathematics and Science is Unacceptable

Eleven Septembers ago, with the heady horizon of a new millennium within
sight, the nation's governors gathered in Charlottesville, Virginia, to
set ambitious goals for our schools. Among the challenges the governors
issued was this one:

*"By the Year 2000, United States students will be first in the world in
mathematics and science achievement."^1^*

A goal like that might be tough, Americans thought, but it was
reachable.

But our effort since has not matched our rhetoric. Results from the
Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) show U.S.
students devastatingly far from this goal by the time they finish high
school.

In an age now driven by the relentless necessity of scientific and
technological advance, the preparation our students receive in
mathematics and science is, in a word, unacceptable. Despite our good
intentions, their learning is too often superficial. Students' grasp of
science as a process of discovery, and of mathematics as the language of
scientific reasoning, is often formulaic, fragile, or absent altogether.
And perhaps most alarming of all, as recent assessments seem to show,
the longer our children study these crucial disciplines, the less
favorably they compare with their peers in other countries.

*The Recycled Message of TIMSS and NAEP: Our Students Are Losing Ground*

America has heard news like this before. In 1957, the sudden appearance
of Sputnik galvanized a massive national effort to win the space race
and improve mathematics and science education. We knew we had to "catch
up with the Russians." With a burst of single-minded intensity, we more
than caught up: in 12 years we achieved the moon. But we did not
duplicate or sustain that intensity, a lesson we have heard three times
over from international assessments of science and mathematics
achievement conducted since the 1960s. The unmistakable message is that
our students' performance relative to their peers in other
countries---our competitors all---is disappointedly unchanged. Their
students have consistently scored higher than U.S. students.^2^
Indicators from those three assessments and those conducted here at home
corroborate the point.

TIMSS Results: The Third International Mathematics and Science Study
assessed the performance of students from 41 countries in 1995. U.S.
fourth-graders scored above the international average in mathematics and
science; eighth-graders scored slightly above the international average
in science and slightly below the international average in mathematics.
However, among 20 nations assessed in advanced mathematics and physics
(students were not assessed from all countries for all grades), *none*
scored significantly lower than the United States in advanced
mathematics, and only one scored lower in physics.^3^ In a phrase, our
mathematics and science students are not "world class."

NAEP Results: The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, the
"Nation's Report Card") periodically reports student achievement in
science and mathematics using four categories: "Below Basic," "Basic,"
"Proficient," and "Advanced." On the 1996 NAEP*, less than one-third* of
all U.S. students in grades 4, 8, and 12 performed at or above the
"Proficient" achievement level in mathematics and science, where
\"Proficient\" represents solid academic performance for each grade
assessed. Perhaps even more alarming, *more than one-third* of U.S.
students scored below the "Basic" level in these subjects, which means
they lack mastery of the prerequisite knowledge and skills needed for
"Proficient" at each grade. While U.S. students do, indeed, learn more
each year they are in school, they are performing less well in twelfth
grade than in the fourth and eighth grades, compared to the standards of
proficiency for those grade levels. Despite some improvements in NAEP
mathematics scores since the 1970s, our students' performance in science
and mathematics has remained at disappointing levels for nearly 30
years.^4^

In sum, whether we look at comparisons of our young people to those of
other nations or look simply at the progress our students are making at
home,^5^ the nation keeps getting the same dismal message about
mathematics and science achievement: our students are losing ground.
It's time we heeded it.

But heeding the bad news has to involve something other than wringing
our hands and raising a polite rallying cry for improvement. The issues
raised by TIMSS, NAEP, and state performance data are deeply entrenched.
They cannot be papered over. Only a well-conceived strategy, grounded in
data and sustained over time, can possibly overcome the status quo. The
majority of states report assessment data for both mathematics and
science; but proficiency levels in both subjects are often too
incomplete to paint a useful portrait for determining accountability.
This is especially true in science, where only 16 states report
proficiency levels. Thus, a crucial first step in creating greater
accountability is for state education agencies to supply to the public
complete, user-friendly, reporting on student performance,
school-by-school.^6^ As it stands, only 12 state education agencies
provide parent information on their Web site guides to student
assessment; that is 38 states too few.

*Why Does It Matter?*

Four important and enduring reasons underscore the need for our children
to achieve competency in mathematics and science: (1) the demands of our
changing economy and workplace, (2) our democracy's continuing need for
a highly educated citizenry, (3) the vital links of mathematics and
science to the nation's national security interests, and (4) the deeper
value of mathematical and scientific knowledge.

The demands of our changing economy and workplace

A Changing Economy: Science and mathematics exert the most visible
influence on the economy through their most rapidly changing
offspring---new technologies.

• New technologies are the relentless drivers behind the nation's
standard of living. Since 1996, national productivity (i.e., output per
worker hour) has increased, on average, by 2.6% per year, a rate that
doubles the standard of living roughly every 25 years.^7^ Such
productivity gains are unsustainable without a workforce sufficiently
educated in the sciences and mathematics.

• The technology-driven economy of the 21st century will add about 20
million jobs to the American economy by 2008---if we can only educate
our young people to fill them.^8^

• Jobs in both the health sciences and computer industries requiring
science and mathematics skills will increase by 5.6 million by 2008. The
Department of Labor estimates that postsecondary institutions will have
to produce nearly four times as many graduates in computer science as
they do now to meet the demand.^9^

• Bureau of Labor Statistics projections for 1998-2008 revealed that
more than two-thirds of the 30 occupational categories expected to have
the fastest growth---most of them high-tech---already had hourly
earnings above the national median; 11 of those job categories were in
the top earnings quartile of \$16.25/hour and up.^10^

• Finance, trade, industrial production, communications, and asset
ownership are becoming increasingly integrated on a global basis. So are
capabilities in science and technology. Singapore, for example,
reputedly has the most technologically intensive workforce in the world.
Israel now produces more technology-based startups than anywhere outside
Silicon Valley; its high-tech exports account for a quarter of its
global sales, and the country boasts 135 engineers per 10,000
citizens---twice the U.S. ratio. Drawing on a young, skilled, and
well-educated workforce, Ireland now produces 60% of all PC
business-application software sold in Europe. The common denominator of
these advances abroad is education---a "raw material" far easier to
acquire than lumber or iron ore.^11^

• Ironically, the U.S. higher education system itself contributes
mightily to the rapid advances by equipping the workforces of our
competitors. The Department of Education has reported that, for 1995-96,
nonresident aliens received 34.6% of all bachelor's and 44% of all
master's degrees in engineering, mathematics, and information science.
These students are out-competing young Americans for university spots
and are returning to their native lands to expand technical capacity
there.^12^

A Changing Workplace: New scientific discoveries not only add to basic
knowledge, they also transform jobs, the lives of families, and the
shape of public issues. The mathematical and scientific preparation of
each new generation---beginning with the one now in school---has become
the precondition not just to progress but to the future itself, as the
links among economy, technologies, and education tighten in a rapidly
changing workplace.

• "Knowledge work" is replacing low-end, low-wage jobs. In 1950, 80% of
jobs were classified as "unskilled"; now, an estimated 85% of all jobs
are classified as "skilled."^13^ A telling example is found in machine
tooling. The operators of today's computer-numerically-controlled (CNC)
manufacturing technology now need sophisticated skills, commonly
including computer programming and knowledge of calculus.^14^

• Many American companies now have to import the computing talent they
need to stay competitive. Two years ago the Congress had to pass special
legislation to permit the entry of computer workers, in rapidly
escalating numbers, from abroad. The so-called "H-1B Visa Bills"
progressively raised the ceiling to permit the entry of some 300,000
temporary, non-immigrant, skilled computer workers between 1998 and
2002.

• Training Magazine reports that approximately \$62.5 billion was spent
by businesses on training in 1999.^15^ Much of these funds are spent on
upgrading basic employee skills, many of which should have been acquired
at school. In too many contexts, the nation is paying twice to equip its
workforce.

• Among the scarier statistics recently reported by a Midwest think tank
is this one: 60% of all new jobs in the early 21st century will require
skills that are possessed by only 20% of the current workforce.^16^

Our democracy's need for an educated citizenry

It is not just the role that mathematics, science, and technology play
in the changing economy and workplace that matters. Mathematics and
science have become so pervasive in daily life that we tend to overlook
them. Literacy in these areas affects the ability to understand weather
and stock reports, develop a personal financial plan, or understand a
doctor's advice. Taking advantage of mathematical and scientific
information does not generally require an expert's grasp of those
disciplines. But it does require a distinctive approach to analyzing
information. We *all* have to be able to make accurate observations,
develop conjectures, and test hypotheses---in short, we have to be
familiar with a scientific approach.

Examples of science-related issues with far-reaching implications for
public and private life that require the understanding of an informed
citizenry are present everywhere:

• In biology: Cloning of organisms, the selective genetic manipulation
of human reproduction, and the use of DNA as courtroom evidence;

• In health: The development of new drugs, chemical and biological
terrorism, the effect of agricultural herbicides and pesticides on the
food chain, whether to take nutritional supplements, or even calculating
the nutritional value of a week's groceries;

• In computer science: Issues of data encryption, maintaining computer
privacy, the conduct of e-commerce; and

• In meteorology and earth science: Global warming, the ozone layer, and
hurricane and earthquake research.

The list is endless, but the point is a simple one. No citizen of
America can participate intelligently in his or her community or,
indeed, conduct many mundane tasks, without being familiar with how
science affects his daily life and how mathematics shapes her world.

The vital links of mathematics and science to our national security
interests

The warp of our nation's security interests and the woof of mathematics
and science are closely woven. It was the pure science of nuclear
physics that first gave rise to, then continued to support, the nation's
nuclear deterrent throughout the last half century. Nuclear
science---put to sea in nuclear submarines---has also formed the second
pillar of our strategic defense system. Long-range bombers, the third
pillar, became possible only with advances in aeronautical science.

Mathematics and science today supply the architecture that gives
structure and strength to the development of new weapons, from
long-range missiles to the B-2 ("Stealth") bomber. Science and
mathematics continuously enhance our armed forces' ability to protect
the nation, whether in the form of vaccinations against chemical and
biological agents, or night-vision goggles for combat troops, or the
Global Positioning Satellite system (GPS) that can pinpoint the location
of virtually any object on the planet. An invisible web of sophisticated
satellite communications technology connects our military forces in the
global defense arena, where U.S. troops must respond quickly and operate
for indefinite periods. On the ground, the modern equipment and weaponry
that our troops are now called on to use in battle require mathematical
and scientific skills, particularly computer-based learning. Finally,
the sophisticated mathematics of encryption supports and protects our
diplomatic and military communications around the world, as well as
those of American corporations.

The deeper value of mathematical and scientific knowledge

The wealth of knowledge that mathematics and science impart for
understanding the world has such breadth that it is easy to overlook the
dimension of depth. But teaching our children these subjects is
important at a more profound level than that of their practical
benefits. Above all, mathematics and science impart three qualities that
define our human world and enable us to meet its challenges.

• First, mathematics and the sciences bring order, harmony, and balance
to our lives. They have great explanatory power. They teach us that our
world is not capricious but predictable, i.e., that it contains pattern
and logic, which can be used in the service of humankind. The analytical
tools of mathematics and the investigative skills of a scientific
approach are also foundational skills for lifelong learning, in other
words, for creating progress itself.

• Second, science and mathematics continually shape and reshape our
history and culture, giving rise to new ideas and inventions. It was
early astronomy that formed the knowledge base of ancient Near Eastern
civilizations. The physics of Newton made the Industrial Revolution
possible. In our own time, the pure science of information theory has
yielded not only computers but also an incredibly useful global
communications system.

• Third, as science and mathematics provide human beings with powerful
tools for understanding and continually reshaping the physical world
itself, they teach us again and again that Nature's secrets can be
unlocked---in short, that the new is possible.

*Not the Last Word*

Despite the pervasiveness of mathematics and science in our lives, the
sad reality is that our nation continues to renege on its "By the Year
2000..." promise. Our schools are not producing graduates with the kinds
of skills our economy needs to remain on the competitive cutting edge.
In con-sequence, we are bequeathing failure to our children. As they try
to meet the challenge with the longest-range implications of
all---securing their own and America's place in the world---they need to
command the disciplines that they are only indifferently mastering
today.

If this were all that could be said, then the future would be bleak
indeed. But it is not. Some important factors have begun to coalesce,
each adding to the others' momentum.

*The Time to Act is Now*

An ancient Chinese proverb says, "The best time to plant a tree is
twenty years ago; the second best time

is today."

We believe that wisdom applies to the task of strengthening and
improving the quality of mathematics and science teaching and learning
in America. Fortunately, an unusual confluence of factors has created an
unprecedented---perhaps once-in-a-lifetime---opportunity for making
progress. Five things seem to be happening at once.

• First, two decades of experience in education reform demonstrate that
tinkering around the edges will not suffice. Happily, education reform
now has the focused attention of the American people. Not long ago, when
asked to name the top problems facing the nation, Americans ranked
education well down on the list. Today, in poll after poll, it is number
one. That kind of concern, focused through the lens of a well-crafted
agenda, offers an opportunity to generate real energy. But that
opportunity will not last forever.

• Second, America now has the abundance of resources it needs to address
the issue of mathematics and science education powerfully. We are still
in the midst of the longest economic expansion in our history. Thanks in
part to a half-century of investment in science and technology, there
may be a trillion-plus-dollar surplus at hand to invest in our people.

• Third, the U.S. teaching force is about to go through a massive
reshuffling. Over the next decade, our schools will replace two-thirds
of their teachers, whether by retirement, attrition, or job changes.
This immense demographic shift in our schools presents us with an
unparalleled chance to plan---to inject new energy into mathematics and
science teaching in the form of new recruitment, training, and
supportive structures that can strengthen teaching at all grade levels.
This we must do, before we are forced to play yet another game of
educational catch-up.

• Fourth, we have learned much in the past generation about what works
in mathematics and science education---about rigorous curriculum, high
standards,^17^ effective teaching methods, challenging assessments, and
how young people learn.^18^ In several states, school districts, and
schools, innovative approaches are being attempted. Many are promising.
We need to build on these approaches and extend them with new research.
We now have the chance to bring this knowledge together in a mathematics
and science education effort that will serve as a powerful tool for
change. Ignored research is worthless; unused tools can only rust.

• Finally, many more able college students are expressing an interest in
teaching. The success of such programs as Teach for America and
AmeriCorps, and the national resurgence in volunteerism, demonstrate
that the long dormant idealism of a former generation has been
reawakened. According to a recent poll, 10% of young Americans say they
want to teach in our schools---double the number who said so in
1982.^19^

Now, The Glimpse of a Greater Challenge

At the beginning of the 20th century, schools in our country underwent
profound changes as they adapted teaching and curricula to the demands
of industrialization and the needs of a growing population. At the
beginning of the 21st century we look to an even greater challenge. Our
schools, and the teachers who imbue them with life, must find ways to
produce higher levels of proficiency in mathematics and science in all
their students. The American people must do this because our world and
our times require it. If we do not plant this tree today, we will surely
have to do so tomorrow, next month, or next year---at a higher price.

*Toward a Solution*

We Must Place Better Teaching at the Center of Mathematics and Science

The two core premises of this report are simply stated and they
undergird every change we recommend:

\(1\) Now, more than ever, America's students must improve their
performance in mathematics and science. That is the burden of the case
presented thus far.

\(2\) The second premise points in the direction of a solution: The most
direct route to improving mathematics and science achievement for all
students is better mathematics and science teaching. In other words,
better teaching is the lever for change.

To call for higher student achievement and high-quality teaching as the
most direct route to change seems obvious on the surface, but recent
educational reform recommendations have not been sufficiently guided by
this clear linkage. Now, before it's too late, is the time to heed this
guidance.

The evidence for the effect of better teaching is unequivocal.^20^ The
most consistent and most powerful predictors of higher student
achievement in mathematics and science are: (a) full certification of
the teacher and (b) a college major in the field being taught.^21^
Conversely, the strongest predictors of lower student achievement are
new teachers who are uncertified, or who hold less than a minor in their
teaching field.

The difference better teaching makes is often dramatic. The National
Commission on Teaching and America's Future reported in 1996, for
example, that licensing examination scores and teaching experience
accounted for 43% of the gains in mathematics test scores in the early
grades.^22^

The difference better teaching makes for students is paralleled by what
can also happen for teachers. A focused professional development
experience led by qualified teachers, mentors, and colleagues is the
indispensable foundation for competence and high-quality teaching.

As school gets under way in the fall of 2000, many underprepared and
out-of-field teachers will take charge of mathematics and science
classrooms. They, as well as their better-prepared and more
knowledgeable colleagues, must have access to ways to continually
improve their teaching. Only a tailored system of professional
development provides that access.

Thus, if we are to create the kind of mathematics and science education
America needs, we have to start rebuilding at education's very
foundation---teaching itself.^23^ For this reason, the three goals in
this report---and the action strategies that accompany them---point in a
new direction. But before turning to specific remedies, we need to know
more about what is happening now in America's mathematics and science
classrooms---and what should take its place.

The Need for Professional Development

To say that improving the quality of teaching yields better student
performance in science and mathematics makes sense, and some states have
taken this wisdom to heart.^24^ But in many more places, nearly the
reverse is true. There, the knowledge base and arsenal of teachers'
skills must be replenished:

• More than one in four high school mathematics teachers and nearly one
in five high school science teachers lack even a minor in their main
teaching field.^25^

• More than 12% of all new hires enter the classroom without any formal
training; another 14% start work without meeting the teaching standards
of their states.^26^

• About 56% of high school students taking physical science are taught
by out-of-field teachers, as are 27% of those taking mathematics. These
percentages are much greater in high-poverty areas. Among schools with
the highest minority enrollments, for example, students have less than a
50% chance of getting a science or mathematics teacher who holds both a
license and a degree in the field being taught.^27^

Thus, when the dismissal bell rings each day, untold thousands of
American students depart for home having been taught by mathematics and
science teachers ill-equipped for the job. Far too many are
inexperienced beginners, with little or no training, and little or no
mentoring by qualified colleagues. Astonishingly, in no other profession
is so much of such ultimate worth entrusted to people with such uneven
qualifications.

Sidebars

WHO IS A MATH

OR SCIENCE TEACHER?

All teachers, grades K--12, who provide instruction in mathematics or
science for some part of the school day are math or science teachers.
The elementary school generalist, the high school teacher specializing
in physics, as well as the drama teacher who may be assigned to a single
geometry class, are all persons whose teaching quality is of
interest---and of consequence---to the nation.

WHAT IS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?

When this report uses the term "professional development," it means a
planned, collaborative, educational process of continuous improvement
for teachers that helps them do five things:

\(1\) deepen their knowledge of the subject(s) they are teaching; (2)
sharpen their teaching skills in the classroom; (3) keep up with
developments in their fields, and in education generally; (4) generate
and contribute new knowledge to the profession; and (5) increase their
ability to monitor students' work, so they can provide constructive
feedback to students and appropriately redirect their own teaching.

SHORT-TERM SOLUTION CREATES

LONG-TERM PROBLEM

The most common solution to the shortage of qualified mathematics and
science teachers is to assign those classes to out-of-field teachers.
But merely being able to keep one chapter ahead of the students in an
algebra or environmental science text does not a mathematics or science
teacher make.

Predictably, underqualified teachers are most prevalent in urban
schools. A recent survey taken among 40 large urban schools, for
instance, showed that more than 90% of them had an immediate need for a
certified mathematics or science teacher.^28^

End Sidebars

*What Happens in Most Classes*

Despite the dramatic transformations throughout our society over the
last half-century, teaching methods in mathematics and science classes
have remained virtually unchanged. Classroom practice has still hardly
begun to capitalize on the many dimensions of the learning process.

A videotape study of eighth-grade mathematics classes in the United
States reveals that the basic teaching style in American mathematics
classrooms remains essentially what it was two generations ago. The
approach used for the lessons was numbingly predictable: (1) a review of
previous material and homework, (2) a problem illustration by the
teacher, (3) drill on low-level procedures that imitate those
demonstrated by the teacher, (4) supervised seat work by students, often
in isolation, (5) checking of seatwork problems, and (6) assignment of
homework. In not one of 81 videotaped U.S. classes did students
construct a mathematical proof.^29^

In Japan, by contrast, closely supervised, collaborative work among
students is the norm. Teachers begin by presenting students with a
mathematics problem employing principles they have not yet learned. They
then work alone or in small groups to devise a solution. After a few
minutes, students are called on to present their answers; the whole
class works through the problems and solutions, uncovering the related
mathematical concepts and reasoning. The students learn through reasoned
discovery, not lecture alone.

Not incidentally, this approach is a natural outgrowth of the teaching
culture in Japan, which accords teachers not only abundant time for
preparation, but also for collaborative lesson planning. Fully 99% of
all elementary teachers and 50% of all middle school teachers
participate in lesson study groups that meet for two to five hours per
week. The debilitating professional isolation of U.S. teachers stands in
stark contrast to this pattern. A core conclusion from the videotape
research: "The key to long-term improvement \[in teaching\] is to figure
out how to generate, accumulate, and share professional knowledge."^30^

Instructional patterns in the United States do not yield much better
results when it comes to the sciences. Tests of scientific knowledge and
classroom observation indicate that most science students spend much of
their time learning definitions, or the labels that apply to natural
phenomena and scientific processes. In other words, much science
instruction in our schools parallels what happens in a badly taught
history unit on the Civil War, in which students learn nothing but the
names of the generals and the dates of the battles. Seldom are students
asked to master the "big" concepts that make science so powerful and
fascinating.^31^

If the core of mathematics and science is about inquiry, then too many
of today's mathematics and science classrooms come up short. Students
are crippled by content limited to the "What?" They get only a little
bit about the "How?" (or "How else?") and not nearly enough about the
"Why?" Missing almost entirely is "Why should I care?" It is hard to
imagine that students in these classes are gaining the conceptual and
problem-solving skills they need to function effectively as workers and
citizens in today's world---a world that increasingly depends on
mathematics and science.

*What Could Happen*

We Need To Capture A Vision Of High-Quality Teaching

What kind of instruction in mathematics and science can justifiably be
called "high-quality teaching?"

• A core premise of high-quality teaching is that the ability to teach,
contrary to myth, is not "something you're born with"; it can be learned
and refined over time. Specific teaching skills---for example, the
ability to distinguish between what is most important for students to
learn and what is hardest for them to understand---can only be acquired
through training, mentoring, collaboration with peers, and practice.

• High-quality teaching requires that teachers have a deep knowledge of
subject matter. For this there is no substitute.

• In high-quality teaching, the process of inquiry, not merely "giving
instruction," is the very heart of what teachers do. Inquiry not only
tests what students know, it presses students to put what they know to
the test. It uses "hands on" approaches to learning, in which students
participate in activities, exercises, and real-life situations to both
learn and apply lesson content. It teaches students not only what to
learn but how to learn.

• High-quality teaching not only encourages students to learn, it
insists they learn.

• High-quality teaching, especially in the sciences, focuses on the
skills of observation, information gathering, sorting, classifying,
predicting, and testing. A good science or mathematics teacher
encourages students to try new possibilities, to venture possible
explanations, and to follow them to their logical conclusions.

• High-quality teaching fosters healthy skepticism. It encourages
students to submit their work to questioning by others, to pull things
apart and put them back together, and to reflect on how conclusions were
reached.

• High-quality teaching allows for, recognizes, and builds on
differences in the learning styles and abilities of students. It has the
deepest respect for students as persons; it corrects without squelching;
it builds on strengths rather than trying to stamp out weaknesses.

• High-quality teaching is grounded in a careful and thorough alignment
of curriculum, assessment, and high standards for student learning.

• To keep its edge, high-quality teaching must be continually reshaped
by the institutional structures that support it, i.e., by professional
development, continuing education, the effective use of technology, and
recognition and rewards.

• Finally, the effectiveness of high-quality teaching can be evaluated
by the performance and achievement of the students who receive it. Why
isn't high-quality teaching universal? For teachers to deliver
high-quality teaching, they must be empowered to do so. Generating this
kind of teaching means that school boards, administrators, parents, and
policymakers must be willing to stand up for teachers as the primary
drivers of student achievement. Teachers must be given the time they
need within the school day to keep up with new developments in their
fields, teaching aids, materials, and technology. Teachers must be
encouraged to contribute knowledge back to their disciplines. They need
the time and feedback necessary to reflect on their teaching, so they
can get better at it.

> Teacher empowerment also means according teachers the respect they
> deserve for their judgments about learning, rewarding their
> professionalism, and yes, paying them what they are worth.

These concerns are addressed by the goals that follow.

*Three Goals*

The pressing national need for high-quality teaching described in this
report demands a vigorous,

national response that unifies the efforts of all stakeholders in
mathematics and science education. To that end, three wide-ranging but
intertwined goals focus our call for action at the local, state, and
federal levels. Achieving these goals will involve the sustained efforts
of legislators and other decision-makers, the business community, higher
education, school boards and administrators, teachers, and parents. An
intense, serious commitment to achieve these goals, through a
coordinated set of well-funded action strategies, is needed immediately.

All together, the action strategies for achieving these goals nationally
will cost more than \$5 billion annually. Strategy by strategy, the
financial responsibility must be shouldered by the governments and
institutions best equipped to do so, whether at the federal, state, or
local levels, by business and industry, or by higher education. The
agenda laid out here details concrete steps that all Americans can take.
The most important point to keep in focus is that the funds invested in
mathematics and science education today can purchase a lifetime of
leverage on the future of American school children and the nation as a
whole.

Clearly, the cost of achieving these goals will create a noticeable line
item in education budgets at every level. (An estimate of the costs
associated with the first year of implementation of the goals concludes
this report.) At the same time, however, the nation\'s balance sheet now
shows a considerable surplus and the cost of delay is higher still.
Those funds must therefore be put to work now, when and where they can
most usefully equip our young people, and through them the nation
itself, for the new century\'s challenges.

GOAL 1: Establish an ongoing system to improve the quality of
mathematics and science teaching in grades K--12.

If high-quality teaching is the leverage point for improving mathematics
and science education, and if professional development is a prerequisite
for a well-qualified and effective teaching force, then teachers need a
focused support system and enough time to grow as professionals.

Sadly and short-sightedly, however, professional development is too
often treated not as a necessity but as a luxury item on the school
budget. Many people erroneously believe that teachers are not working
unless they are standing in front of a classroom. In fact, preparation
time, individual study time, as well as time for peer contact and joint
lesson planning, are vital sources of both competence and nourishment
for all teachers.

But teachers are granted precious little time for any of these
activities. Equally rare are extended periods of time set aside for
teachers to have challenging educational experiences of their own. In
consequence, much-needed study and preparation time is routinely
sacrificed to in-service events that are no more substantive than a
broad-brush overview of this semester's teaching fad. High-quality
professional development ought to be the lifeblood of American teaching;
instead, it is used only to provide the occasional, anemic transfusion.

Everyone connected with and touched by the U.S. education system is
responsible for changing the character of professional development and
its impact. Teachers need to take responsibility for their

own professionalism as they practice mathematics and science teaching
and work to improve their knowledge

and teaching skills. Principals, superintendents and school boards must
make sure teachers have the time and resources they need to prepare and
collaborate. Teacher preparation institutions, state departments of
education, and the federal government all have a substantive policy role
in enabling teachers, schools, and districts to realize improved
teaching via professional development. The support of businesses, which
stand squarely to benefit from improvements made in the quality of
mathematics and science teaching, is also crucial to enriching the
quality of professional development. Professional associations and their
members can make their own important contributions through workshops,
clinics, and new curricular initiatives.

The place to begin improving mathematics and science teaching is with a
system that promotes high-quality professional development opportunities
for all teachers. Such opportunities should build upon one another and
reinforce accountability. The system must be rooted, first of all, in a
clear determination of the professional development needs of teachers in
every school and school district. That determination must be followed by
an immediate response to the most pressing needs; a sustained response
with the necessary leadership, resources, tools and time; and a
continuing system that recognizes and rewards schools that demonstrate
improved student achievement.

Despite progress in some states and districts, there remains an urgent
need for wide-scale self-examination, strategic planning, and rapid
implementation of a system of professional development tailored to the
needs of those who provide instruction in science and mathematics,
K--12. Action strategies for implementing such a system are outlined
below; each is accompanied by concrete suggestions on how the work can
be done and who can do it.

Action Strategies: What Needs to Happen

Needs Assessment: Each state must quickly undertake a full assessment of
the professional development needs, district by district, of its
mathematics and science teachers, K--12. As many stakeholders as
possible must be involved in this self-evaluation---teachers,
administrators, parents, school boards, businesses, two- and four-year
institutions of higher education, professional associations, and others.
In addition to seeking to upgrade content knowledge and teaching skills,
statewide needs assessments must also determine:

\(1\) whether schools offer a full complement of mathematics and science
courses; (2) whether the quality of curricula, texts, and assessments
strongly supports high-quality teaching and learning; (3) whether the
necessary materials and resources (e.g., laboratories and equipment) are
readily available; (4) whether teachers are adept in using technology;
and (5) whether teacher certification and recertification guidelines are
sufficiently ambitious. As a result, school districts will have a
complete snapshot of the status of their science and mathematics
teaching corps, enabling the ready identification of professional
development tasks that must be targeted first.

Based on what is learned from these needs assessments, each state, with
district input, must move immediately to implement a system of
professional development, designed to address the short- and long-term
needs of its mathematics and science teachers. To put this in
perspective, collectively the states must plan to quickly reach the 1.7
million teachers nationwide who provide instruction in science and
mathematics.

Summer Institutes: In the near term, two-week Summer Institutes will
address the most pressing problems, such as providing opportunities for
upgrading content knowledge for out-of-field teachers, conducting
subject-based workshops for all science and mathematics teachers,
integrating technology into the teaching of mathematics and science,
introducing new teaching methods, and improving skills for teaching
specific subject matter by grade. Over the long term, states are urged
to tailor their Institutes to teachers' identified needs and to make
regular Institute attendance a critical component of teacher
recertification, with the purpose of continually increasing teachers'
science and mathematics knowledge base. In many locations, the powerful
technology of distance learning can open Summer Institutes to a
statewide teacher audience.

Inquiry Groups: However well they may have been prepared to teach, and
whatever knowledge they may have gained in Summer Institutes, all
teachers need continuing, collegial contact, peer reinforcement and
input from experts to sharpen their skills and deepen their subject
knowledge. Building- and district-level Inquiry Groups are envisioned as
communities of learning. They will provide a specific venue for teachers
to share ideas, gain the benefit of one another's teaching experience,
engage in common study to enrich their subject knowledge, learn more
about technology, and design ways to incorporate local, state, and
national educational developments (e.g., subject-matter learning
standards) into their teaching. While critically important during the
school year, Inquiry Groups must also continue through the summer,
enabling teachers to explore some issues without the pressing
responsibility of daily student contact. For districts moving to
11-month salary schedules, full participation in an Inquiry Group ought
to be an integral part of every teacher's responsibilities when school
is not in session.

Time for in-depth study through regular work with peer Inquiry Groups is
a teacher's most valuable professional resource. It must be considered
sacrosanct.

Perhaps most important, these groups can be a rich source of new
knowledge about teaching itself, generated from the field. Such groups
can readily take advantage of local resources (e.g., businesses,
museums, laboratories), other Inquiry Groups from neighboring districts,
and faculty from nearby two- and

four-year higher education institutions. Inquiry Groups could also be
networked electronically, via distance learning technology, for wider
sharing of information, instruction, and resources.

Leadership Training: Summer Institutes and Inquiry Groups must be
facilitated by teachers who are current with the most effective teaching
methods in their disciplines, who have shown demonstrable results of
higher student achievement in mathematics and science, and who are adept
in the use of technology for teaching and learning. Although there are
many such teachers, the demand far outpaces the supply. To remedy this,
many more potential leaders must be identified and trained.

Internet Portal: High-quality mathematics and science teaching requires
not only access to technology (especially the Internet) but also regular
training in how to use it effectively. An Internet Portal, i.e., an
interactive, conversational Web resource dedicated to science and
mathematics instruction, would provide links to an ever-expanding
knowledge base that would be invaluable in supporting high-quality
professional development.

The Portal, functioning as a "virtual resource center" and updated
frequently, would provide hyper-links to form a "one-stop-shopping"
learning network. It would also codify what is already available on the
Web elsewhere, while providing a framework for new entries over time.
Among the activities and resources envisioned for the Portal are: n An
online professional journal that encourages mathematics and science
teachers to engage in publishable research and to share new teaching
strategies with colleagues, both nationwide and internationally;

• User-friendly access to the growing number of Web sites with real-time
data and experiences to support high-quality teaching and learning;

• A dedicated database for mathematics and science teachers, containing
teaching ideas, lesson plans, student work, and other resources;

• An interactive, online resource for conversations, meetings, and idea
sharing;

• An outlet to distance-learning courses in science and math for K--12
students and their teachers; and

• Interactive video, both for observing good teachers and critiquing
teachers' own teaching, for mentoring, and for online instruction.

Coordinating Council for Mathematics and Science Teaching: Implementing
and sustaining the initiatives described above, as well as several of
those that follow in subsequent goals, require special attention from a
nongovernmental organization. A Coordinating Council for Mathematics and
Science Teaching will serve primarily as a collaborative body. It will
function as a broker and matchmaker, bringing together groups that have
a stake in mathematics and science education. The Council will also
monitor state and local progress on needs assessments, Summer
Institutes, Leadership Training, and other initiatives, and make such
information widely available. In addition, the Council will take a
special interest in creating opportunities for states and localities to
collaborate in implementing the goals and strategies offered in this
report, particularly those related to the professional development needs
of mathematics and science teachers. Key activities for the Council in
this arena include:

• Encouraging state needs assessments and collecting and publishing data
on mathematics and science teaching that emerge from the assessments;

• Helping schools and school districts consider ways to align their
professional development system with state curricula, teaching
guidelines, performance standards, and assessment frameworks;

• Disseminating models for restructuring the school day and teachers'
responsibilities to provide sufficient time to support a system of
ongoing professional development;

• Collecting and disseminating research on improving mathematics and
science teaching; developing

> databases relevant to teaching; identifying and promoting "best
> practices" in mathematics and science teaching; facilitating
> nationwide communication among teachers; and

• Measuring progress and making the results of implementing these action
strategies widely known to the public.

Rewards Programs: Just as we do our children a profound disservice when
we fail to reward their effort, or worse, promote them beyond their
merit, so do we cheat their teachers when we fail to recognize their
success, or worse, reward them for mediocre performance. To increase the
attractiveness of the professional development system, and to make clear
that continual improvement in teaching methods is highly valued, all
states and local districts must institute a program of recognition and
rewards to deserving schools and teachers. Schools with exemplary
professional development systems, and those that, most importantly, show
improvement on rigorous assessments of student achievement in
mathematics and science, must be recognized with monetary rewards for
their teachers and other staff, and through well-publicized, showcase
events. Such programs must speak directly to the bedrock issue of the
accountability of our schools---and especially of teachers---for the
performance of students.

GOAL 2: Increase significantly the number of mathematics and science
teachers and improve the quality of their preparation.

The demand for teachers generally, and for certified and fully qualified
mathematics and science teachers specifically, is far outpacing the
supply. The most recent data available (1993-94) on nationwide vacancies
indicate that 20% of the slots---about 6,500 individuals---were filled
by uncertified teachers. A more recent survey indicates that the problem
is not diminishing. The National Science Teachers Association has
reported that 48% of all middle schools and 61% of all high schools
responding reported difficulty in finding qualified science
teachers.^32^ In urban areas the problem intensifies: 95% of urban
districts report an immediate need for high school science and
mathematics teachers, while 80% report a need for middle school science
and mathematics teachers.^33^ These estimated shortages are likely to
grow with the impending retirement of almost two-thirds of the current
teaching force. The quality of instruction in mathematics and science
will be compromised unless the pipeline of qualified teachers expands
significantly.

An estimated 240,000 middle and high school mathematics and science
teachers will be needed over the next 10 years.^34^ Of this total,
nearly 70% will be new-comers to the profession. The negative impact of
the teacher shortage is compounded by the diffuse and therefore uneven
quality of the education delivered by teacher preparation institutions.
The sad fact is that many teacher preparation programs do not build an
adequate knowledge base in their graduates. An aggressive recruitment
program, therefore, must be accompanied by an equally aggressive, and
simultaneous, effort to improve teacher preparation.^35^

To deal with these issues, two fundamental tasks must be accomplished:
(1) identify exemplary models of teacher preparation that can be widely
replicated, and (2) find ways to attract large numbers of qualified
candidates into teaching (e.g., persons in mid-career seeking new
challenges). We must train these individuals to high standards and
provide them with the resources they need, throughout their careers, to
meet the certification requirements and demands of high-quality
teaching. Once employed, these new teachers can both contribute to and
learn from Inquiry Groups that are part of a well-conceived professional
development strategy in their respective schools.

The first step in such a strategy, however, must be a preparation
program that imparts a deep understanding of content, teaches
prospective teachers many ways to motivate young minds, especially with
the appropriate use of technology, and instills a knowledge of---and
basic skills in using---effective teaching methods in the discipline.

Action Strategies: What Needs to Happen

Exemplary Models: Identifying exemplary programs of teacher preparation
around the country, and finding ways to encourage others to multiply
their success, are basic to reaching Goal 2. To identify successful
approaches and expand the pool of exemplary institutions and
well-prepared new teachers, rigorous criteria are needed beyond those
already used by credentialing and accrediting bodies. (Better-targeted
performance criteria are indicated for teacher preparation institutions
if for no other reason than the less-than-successful teaching generated
by many of their graduates.) Designation as an exemplary program must be
highly selective, a mark of prestige; nonetheless, there should be no
artificial limit on the number of institutions accorded that status.

Each group of exemplary programs will keep its status for five years, at
which time they will undergo a new review. Once identified, faculty at
institutions with exemplary programs will need to collaborate with
colleagues at other higher education institutions to increase the number
of programs that can meet the exemplary criteria in subsequent years. In
addition, designation as "Exemplary" should be required to qualify two-
and four-year institutions to receive the federal funds needed to
support full-tuition four-year scholarships. These new scholarships can
entice high school students to become mathematics and science teachers
and increase the number of undergraduates who can benefit from
high-quality teacher

preparation. When fully operational, more than 1,500 scholarships will
be available yearly to high-achieving students who are attracted and
committed to math and science teaching as a career.

Teacher Recruitment: Once we can identify the kinds of teacher
preparation programs that are most effective, and have a mechanism in
place to increase the number of such programs, we can give full
attention to an ambitious program to recruit students to enter the corps
of mathematics and science teachers. Incentive-based strategies offer
the most promise for attracting individuals capable of high-quality
teaching, drawing from at least three groups of potential candidates:

• To address the pressing needs created by teacher shortages in
mathematics and science, recent college graduates and persons at
mid-career with baccalaureate (or higher) degrees in mathematics or
science will be invited to compete for 3,000 prestigious, one-year, paid
fellowships that lead to certification as mathematics and science
teachers.^36^ At the end of their training, Fellows will agree to be
employed for five years, to teach in districts with math and science
teacher shortages.^37^

• To attract college students, a federally funded loan program, based on
financial need, is required to target those considering mathematics and
science teaching as a career. These loans will be forgiven, contingent
upon the students' agreement to teach for five years in districts with
shortages of mathematics and science teachers. The number of available
loans can be adjusted annually to reflect the demand; 6000 loans are
appropriate for current shortages of qualified teachers.

• Although high school seniors typically explore various career options,
many are open to the idea of teaching. To attract this group, 1500
scholars will be competitively chosen to attend one of the exemplary
preparation institutions on a full-tuition scholarship. In return, these
students must agree to teach for five years in areas with teacher
shortages.

Mathematics and Science Teaching Academies: An entirely new kind of
research- and school-based preparation program must be created to
provide a year of teacher education for those with scientific and
mathematical content knowledge. Specifically, 15 Mathematics and Science
Teaching Academies must be competitively selected, one in each of the 10
federal regions, with 5 more strategically located. No new
brick-and-mortar infrastructure is envisioned. Rather, each Academy will
build on existing institutions and bring them together into a new kind
of relationship. Each Academy will ideally comprise an administrative
consortium of at least one institution of higher education (including
two-year colleges), neighboring school districts, business partners,
members of the Eisenhower Math and Science Consortia, and perhaps
others. The permanent staff at each Academy will be kept small,
supplemented with visiting scholars on sabbatical.

Three thousand competitively selected Academy Fellows with degrees in
mathematics and science will be identified from among recent college
graduates and persons at mid-career who are seeking a new challenge in
life. Fellows will be appointed annually to receive a one-year,
intensive course in effective teaching methods in mathematics or
science; each will receive a \$30,000 stipend for the year. Training for
all Fellows must include school-based internships that involve
supervised teaching.

After an intense high-quality preparation program, these individuals
will be ideal job candidates for school districts suffering from
mathematics and science teacher shortages in middle and high schools.
Federal funds, up to \$10,000 per Fellow, will be available to the
districts that hire Fellows at the conclusion of their course of study,
with two provisos: that the funds be locally matched, and that a
district-wide induction program be created for as many new mathematics
and science teachers as possible. It is worth pointing out that
districts that already have established Inquiry Groups will benefit
greatly from the newly minted knowledge that Fellows bring to their
posts, just as Fellows will benefit from sharing experiences with
seasoned veterans.

Once established, all the Academies will work collaboratively to share
knowledge and experience. Similarly, the Academies and exemplary
undergraduate teacher preparation programs will work collaboratively to
share lessons learned in their quest for high-quality preparation for
teaching.

GOAL 3: Improve the working environment and make the teaching profession
more attractive for K--12 mathematics and science teachers.

Our society frequently refuses to recognize the professional status of
teachers, ranking them below doctors, lawyers, and clergy. Many
Americans think "anyone can be a teacher" and that little expertise is
required. And because teachers are not fully appreciated for the special
knowledge and skills required to do their jobs, they are vulnerable to
public attack.^38^ This widespread attitude is

simply wrongheaded.

The low esteem teachers experience is only one source of the
disappointment they feel, however. The lack of positive regard for
teachers is compounded when efforts to recruit new members to the
teaching profession fail to solve the staffing problems of schools.
Turnover in the nation's teaching force is high---about 14% overall in
1994-95, with somewhat higher rates among mathematics and science
teachers.^39^ The top reason mathematics and science teachers leave
teaching is "dissatisfaction" with their working environment, a factor
cited far more often among mathematics and science teachers than others
(40% vs. 29%).^40^ The specific causes given for their unhappiness make
a long list, but chief among them are these professional issues: lack of
leadership and respect from principals, lack of classroom autonomy, lack
of respect from students, poor support from administrators, overly large
classes, and poorly equipped classrooms and laboratories.^41^ But by
far, the number one reason for dissatisfaction among mathematics and
science teachers is "poor salary"---cited by 66% of those who leave
their jobs.^42^ This issue is examined separately at the conclusion of
the report.

The professional environment of too many mathematics and science
teachers contains too many of these negative factors. Their effect is to
drive more and more teachers out of the profession, which leads to
stop-gap strategies such as out-of-field teaching and temporary
certification, which in turn deprofessionalize teaching even more---a
vicious circle.

Energetic and sustained steps are needed to break out of this downward
spiral. State education agencies, school districts, and schools must
move immediately and aggressively to make mathematics and science
teaching more attractive.^43^ And, they must have the widespread support
of local businesses and the public.

Not all these "dissatisfactions" can be remedied at once, but it is
possible to launch a turnaround that will foster better teaching. Three
action strategies are suggested here. First, beginning teachers,
especially, need help in acclimating to the challenges and opportunities
of teaching. Second, some business/school district partnerships have
already proven themselves uniquely capable of the kind of collaboration
that fosters high-quality teaching and makes the profession more
attractive. More of these vital partnerships are needed. Third, veteran
teachers who demonstrate improvement and who regularly seek new
challenges should be encouraged to stay in the classroom and rewarded
for their efforts. The following action strategies are accompanied by
concrete suggestions on how the work can be done and who can do it.

Action Strategies: What Needs to Happen

Induction Programs: A first step is to set up special "induction"
programs for new teachers, especially in districts that may not be able
to hire Academy Fellows. This kind of program is routine throughout the
business world as a means of easing new people into the workplace,
imparting the "company culture," fostering employee loyalty, and
acknowledging leadership and excellence in seasoned veterans. Such
programs can also create formal mentoring relationships, including
participation in Inquiry Groups, that focus on transmitting not only
content matter but also vital knowledge and skills related to teaching
itself. Other induction strategies include:

• Frequent, formal interaction with master teachers, including class
observations and teaching critiques. Several states and districts have
already launched such programs;

• Policies that ensure that new teachers do not inherit the most
demanding teaching schedules and most challenging students;

• Policies aimed at focusing a new teacher's time and energy on
teaching, e.g., by excluding or limiting extracurricular duties; and

• Policies that ensure instruction in the use of technology in general,
including participation in the existing high-quality programs designed
for this purpose, and in the use of the mathematics and science teaching
Portal in particular.

Business/District Partnerships: Many businesses already serve their
local communities in extraordinary ways.

These enlightened companies are needed as models for others who can
expand, rejuvenate, or establish new partnerships that will help
strengthen professionalism in mathematics and science teaching. Acting
with states, districts, and other stakeholders, business/district
partnerships can take several steps to encourage teachers to stay in the
classroom, continually sharpen their skills, optimize working
conditions, and encourage widespread public support for mathematics and
science education. Some of these steps---but not all---involve
commitments of funds; all of them do involve business commitments of
time and talent. Among the specific roles business/district partnerships
can play are the following:

• Business/district partnerships can collaborate to provide facilities,
materials, equipment, scholarship support, and other resources to
enhance the learning environment in K--12 mathematics and science
classrooms, and to support students preparing to become mathematics and
science teachers. For example, a local business could stock a science
laboratory or train teachers in the use of the Internet Portal;

• Partnerships can provide or help to generate community grants and
incentives to schools that restructure time and personnel
responsibilities for mathematics and science teachers, thereby enabling
them to focus their energies on collaboration and high-quality teaching;

• Partnerships can help schools and school districts sustain induction
programs for all teachers of mathematics and science, K-12. They might,
for example, help raise funds to pay annual stipends to mentors. Local
businesses might also offer new teachers and mentors opportunities for
field-based learning experiences that can enhance teaching;

• Such partnerships can establish and run paid summer internship
programs within companies for interested teachers, both as a means of
expanding their skills and of enhancing their incomes;

• Business/district partnerships can develop "release time" programs
that make employees available to act as mentors or to assist mathematics
and science teachers in other ways---without loss of seniority or
benefits. Similarly, business partners can work with colleges and
universities to significantly reduce the number of out-of-field
mathematics and science teachers by helping to retrain unqualified
teachers, or by releasing qualified employees to work in schools; and

• Business/district partnerships can serve as advocates for additional
teachers to go through the advanced certification process of the
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and support the costs
of participation.

But a caveat is in order here. As vitally important as the participation
of the business community is in improving mathematics and science
education, the long-term responsibility for public education remains
with the public. The proper role of American business and
business/district partnerships lies in helping to "jump-start"
initiatives called for here, not in financing them indefinitely. Equally
important is the pragmatic realization that some districts do not have a
business base nearby. The needs of business-poor districts in rural and
inner-city areas are just as urgent as those where businesses are
prominent; therefore, states, school organization advocacy groups (e.g.,
PTAs and PTOs), and other voluntary associations must step into the
breach to ensure that differences between districts are not deepened.

Career-long Incentives: All groups with a stake in mathematics and
science education must provide incentives for deserving mathematics and
science teachers to remain in teaching and improve their skills. These
incentives must be directly tied to accountability measures for teachers
that take student performance seriously as a criterion of high-quality
teaching and teachers' professional competence.

Mathematics and science teachers, like other professionals, ought to be
fully able to advance through a series of career stages that reflect
both their intellectual and professional growth; teachers who
demonstrate improvement in their teaching must be appropriately
acknowledged.^44^

Often, the only opportunity for teachers to advance is to leave the
classroom and take a position in school administration. In fact,
achieving the goal of high-quality teaching demands that good teachers
be able to flourish in the classroom. That can only happen when teachers
have an open-ended opportunity to improve their teaching and be
recognized for their accomplishments. Today, almost all teachers are
paid on the basis of years of experience and number of education units
and degrees earned. More progressive salary structures---tied to
increased levels of teacher responsibility and to job-performance
criteria---are needed.

Teachers also need to know that they are valued. When appropriate, civic
organizations ought to demonstrate the community's appreciation to
hard-working, highly accomplished teachers.

*Teacher Pay: The Litmus Test*

Teachers in this country are scandalously underpaid, a fact that
invariably affects the quality of teaching in our nation's classrooms.
The fact is, many teachers experience their jobs as exercises in irony:
they are expected to have high-quality qualifications and skills, but
they are neither accorded professional status nor rewarded with a
professional's salary. Creating high-quality teaching in mathematics and
science education demands both.

What Teachers Earn: The National Center for Education Statistics reports
that, on average, teachers earn 29% less than other workers with a
baccalaureate degree (\$35,048 per year compared to \$49,362 per year in
1997), a differential that has nearly quadrupled during the economic
expansion of the 1990s. The demands of the economy and workplace are
widening this gap. Given that the national average starting salary for
teachers is \$25,735,35^45^ the teaching profession is nowhere near
being a financially competitive option for most young people who leave
college with backgrounds in mathematics and science. In fact,
baccalaureate degree earners in these fields can earn twice as much in
private industry as in teaching.^46^ Making sure that teaching
mathematics and science has appeal as a career option is directly linked
to the potential for meaningful salary growth. It is hard to escape the
conclusion that without better pay for mathematics and science teachers,
the high-quality teaching needed in these fields will be very difficult
to sustain.

One powerful litmus test of how serious we are about providing
high-quality mathematics and science teaching is what we are willing to
pay good mathematics and science teachers. That is not really so much a
financial test as it is a policy one, not so much a matter of the
pocketbook as one of political will. And that statement, in the end,
leads to this final point.

*Taking Personal Responsibility*

This report has laid out a coordinated set of tasks for the key
stakeholders in mathematics and science education. But the story is not
yet complete. We therefore put this challenge directly to the American
people: if you have found our case persuasive, it is up to you to take
responsibility for achieving these goals.

Realistically, neither paying mathematics and science teachers what they
are worth, nor any other issue raised in this report, is a problem that
will be solved by "someone else." It is this nation's citizens and
taxpayers whose priorities and principles should be honored in public
policy, including---and in this context especially---in decisions about
what teachers are paid.

So we put this agenda squarely before you:

• If you don't know how well children in your local schools are
performing in mathematics and science on challenging state and district
assessments, find out. How do their scores stack up against those of
children in neighboring schools? Then decide if they are learning what
they need to know to "hit the future running."

• If you are unaware of what mathematics and science teachers are paid
where your children attend school, find out. Then decide what steps you
will take to bring teacher salaries up to the professional level that
reflects the value you, as parents and as taxpayers, put on their work
and their performance.

• If you believe that out-of-field teaching, temporary certificates, and
high turnover among mathematics and science teachers are unacceptable
outcomes of current policies, and if you believe that high-quality
teaching is the right direction to take, then declare yourself. It is up
to you to

put an end the former and ensure the latter.

• If you want your voice to be heard, call your child's principal, your
school board representative, your local school superintendent. Call and
write your representatives in state government. Contact the local
chapters of the professional teachers' organizations whose members teach
your children subjects such as arithmetic, biology, and algebra. Ask
them: "What is being done *here* to attract more teachers into
mathematics and science teaching?" "How many teachers here are teaching
out-of-field?" "What are mathematics and science teachers paid *here*
and why?" "What is the status of professional development in math and
science instruction *here*?" "What do you need?" "How can I help?"

High-quality teaching in mathematics and science cannot be bought on the

cheap. But it comes back---ten-, twenty-, a hundredfold---to the nation,
the community, and especially to our own children, in the form of a
better prepared workforce, a more productive economy, and a more
creative people.

The time to find out what you can do and to whom you should speak is
now. Go to the meetings; get involved. Only when those who sit in the
seat of power understand the public's priorities can they act in the
citizens' interest. And only you can declare that interest.

This Commission has done what it can do. It has studied the problem and
it here offers the American people three goals. We believe they can be
achieved, and we have offered ideas on how. Whether they are achieved is
still to be decided. We know that it is not enough to call for change.
In a democracy, the people create real change, not commissions.

As the Chinese proverb says, the time to plant the tree is now---before
it's too late.

Sidebars

SCALING UP

Several states and school districts already provide excellent
instruction in mathematics and science. Their students\' test scores
provide evidence of high-quality teaching. But occasional oases of
excellence are not enough to meet the nation\'s needs. That means
scaling up our efforts to match our aspirations. Our perspective must be
nationwide and we must intensify our efforts immediately: not next week,
or next year, but now. Our aim can be no less than equipping every K-12
student in every school with an excellent education in mathematics and
science. The three strategic goals of this report are therefore just as
urgent as they are visionary.

The estimated costs that accompany the Action Strategies proposed here
remind us that we will get only what we are willing to pay for.

WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL?

A professional "professes" the values associated with a particular
occupation, and has acquired the special core of knowledge and skills
needed to serve others effectively through that occupation. If
professionals do not maintain and expand their knowledge and skills,
they will atrophy.

We have the resources and insights to build an even stronger base of
professional knowledge about math-ematics and science teaching. Where
that is not available, it has to be developed.

NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• Some selected states will begin their needs assessments immediately.
States should first establish criteria and protocols for conducting
their needs assessment, then go on to identify and analyze state
certification and recertification requirements. Once procedures and
systems have been established and tested in these initial states, what
is learned can be widely disseminated to all states.

• Governors, state legislatures, and state boards of education in each
of the remaining states (thence districts) must work together quickly to
allocate the federal, state, and local funds and staff needed to develop
and oversee a similar assessment of the professional development needs
of mathematics and science teachers.

• Two- and four-year colleges and universities, using their mathematics,
science, and education faculties, can assist school districts and others
in planning and implementing needs assessments.

SUMMER INSTITUTES

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• As with the needs assessments, selected states will establish
protocols and evaluation criteria for Summer Institutes, working in
concert with state boards of education. The lessons learned from these
experiences will be widely disseminated to other states to inform their
efforts.

• Governors, state legislatures, state boards of education, and
districts in each of the remaining states must work together quickly,
allocating funds and staff, to develop and oversee a series of Summer
Institutes addressing the most pressing professional development needs
of mathematics and science teachers.

• Federal, state, and local professional development funds must be
allocated to this coordinated purpose---rather than in the diffuse way
that is currently all too common. Teachers should be compensated for
their participation in the Summer Institutes.

• Institutions of higher education and professional associations are
well positioned to assist in planning, hosting, conducting, and
evaluating Summer Institutes.

INQUIRY GROUPS

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• Districts must establish conditions that promote and support
continuing learning communities among science and mathematics teachers
in each school, focusing on teaching quality. Doing so will demand a
reallocation of teacher time and professional development funds to focus
on discipline-based efforts.

• Policies must be enacted by school boards, and rigorously enforced by
school administrators, to ensure that this reallocation occurs.

• Access to a variety of Web-based resources---through an Internet
Portal dedicated to mathematics and science teaching---must be readily
available to all Inquiry Group participants.

• Parent organizations have a watchdog and advocacy role to play in
ensuring that Inquiry Groups have the means and opportunity to succeed.

LEADERSHIP TRAINING

Who Will Make it Happen and How?

• Appropriate agencies within the federal government must provide the
funding needed to train cadres of facilitators and help them,
thereafter, to keep abreast of new insights and research in science and
mathematics teaching.

• These trained leaders should work in their respective districts and
states to organize and facilitate Summer Institutes and Inquiry Groups.
They should also be proactive in helping colleagues develop their
Internet and research skills.

THE INTERNET PORTAL

Who Will Make It Happen and How?

• Appropriate federal agencies, especially the National Science
Foundation, must scale up current efforts to create a digital library
that will serve as the foundation for an Internet Portal.

• States must provide search engines keyed to their respective state
standards and curriculum frameworks for more tailored use of the
information in the Portal.

• Businesses, particularly those in information management, have a
crucial role to play in contributing to and sustaining the Internet
Portal.

• Curriculum and software developers, publishers, and academics should
collaborate with teachers in generating the resources and tools offered
via the Portal.

• Local school boards must make it a matter of policy that mathematics
and science teachers have access to, and training in how to use, the
Internet Portal.

COORDINATING COUNCIL

Who Will Make It Happen and How?

• Financial support for the Council must come from a diversified funding
stream, including the federal and state governments, businesses, and
foundations.

• Where appropriate, the Council will partner with existing groups to
provide

the necessary services and motivation to states and districts.

• Institutions of higher education will support the Council's mission by
providing the training venues and the human resources needed to enact
Council-brokered activities.

REWARDS PROGRAMS

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• U.S. corporations and businesses, which have a stake in improving
mathematics and science education, should provide significant funds,
over several years, to support rewards and recognition programs in those
states and districts that have implemented a system of high-quality
professional development and assessment.

• It makes sense to gradually move rewards and recognition programs
under the umbrella of state and local education agencies, although a
strong business presence is needed to keep school-business relationships
viable and to impart to the public the importance of the business stake
in mathematics and science education.

EXEMPLARY MODELS

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• An appropriate federal agency, working with an array of highly
respected professionals, will move quickly to set the criteria and
process for identifying exemplary programs.

• This agency will also move, in a very timely fashion, to facilitate
the identification process for new and redesignated models.

• Federal funds should be made available to the identified institutions
for their use in supporting promising students to study science and
mathematics teaching.

RECRUITMENT

Who Will Make It Happen and How?

• The federal government must support an aggressive, national outreach,
media campaign to attract young people to teaching careers in
mathematics and science.

• Those in frequent and close contact with the academic progress of such
students---parents, school counselors, principals, teachers,
professors---must build on the campaign with encouragement and guidance
for these prospective teachers. The Coordinating Council will
disseminate materials and information in support of the campaign and
stimulate recruitment strategies for mid-career and recent college
graduates.

• Through appropriate federal agencies, funds will be available to
support the different scholarship and loan programs.

• Appropriate federal agencies will administer the financial aid aspects
of the programs.

MATHEMATICS and SCIENCE TEACHING ACADEMIES

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• Academies must be established through a competitive grant process
administered by appropriate federal agencies and supported by federal
funding.

• Higher education institutions will take the lead in the administration
of the Academies. Members of the faculty from science, mathematics, and
education departments will have substantive roles.

• Nearby school districts must provide internships for Fellows during
their year of training, and districts with a demonstrated shortage will
hire Fellows upon their completion of the Academy's program.

• Districts must also develop and implement induction programs for new
mathematics and science teachers, including involvement in their Inquiry
Groups.

INDUCTION PROGRAMS

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• State leaders, school board members, local superintendents, and
principals must act with determination, realign priorities, and take the
policy initiatives needed to develop the induction programs that can
foster professionalism across the continuum of teaching experience.

• Professional associations have a powerful role to play in creating and
offering model professional development and induction programs, as well
as model mentoring programs.

• The Coordinating Council must provide a forum for sharing information
about existing and new model induction programs and reporting on the
effectiveness of such programs, especially regarding issues of retention
and teaching quality.

• The American Federation of Teachers and the National Education
Association have an enormous stake in professionalizing teaching.
Superintendents and principals need to be able to count on union members
to support efforts to develop induction programs aimed at improving the
quality of mathematics and science education in grades K--12.

BUSINESS/SCHOOL DISTRICT PARTNERSHIPS

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• Business/district partnerships must focus on mechanisms for sharing
knowledge, expertise, and resources. Together, they must define the best
match between the needs and capabilities of the two partners.

• The Coordinating Council, working with groups such as the National
Alliance of Business and the Business Coalition for Education Reform,
must provide models of existing partnerships and encourage the
development of new ones.

• Both businesses and school districts must assign a high-level staff
person as a liaison with responsibility for maintaining and improving
the partnership, coordinating the assignment of business personnel to
the schools and vice versa, and developing appropriate activities.

CAREER-LONG INCENTIVES

Who Will Make Them Happen and How?

• All members of the local education community (principals,
administrators, school boards, parents, civic leaders, etc.) must
provide recognition to teachers whose students show higher achievement
on high- quality measures.

• To encourage excellent teachers to remain in the classroom, school
districts must create new salary structures that recognize added
responsibilities and achievements.

THE VITAL ROLE OF LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS

Local school boards, because they are the decision-making body closest
to the classroom, play a central role in setting a new course. It is
they who have the ultimate responsibility to bring high-quality teaching
in math-ematics and science to our schools. It is their job (within some
state-imposed guidelines) to set local instructional priorities and
policy, to determine budgets, and to set salary scales.

Perhaps most important of all, it is school boards that are
accountable---to citizens, parents, and taxpayers alike---for the
education our children receive. Whether elected or appointed, school
board members serve at the sufferance of the public.

But to be accountable, school boards must be held accountable. They must
be called on to interpret their actions and justify their decisions. And
in America, making them responsive is the people's job.

End of sidebars.

*What Can You Do?*

Every American has a stake in mathematics and science teaching for the
21st Century. Parents, teachers, administrators, school board members,
higher education institutions, state political leaders, and business
leaders have particularly critical roles to play in ensuring success. To
improve student achievement in mathematics and science, everyone
involved must first ask themselves several hard questions and then must
take action.

The Commission targeted the seven stakeholder groups below. For each
group, several questions are posed to direct attention to critical
issues. A checklist of important steps is then provided to define a
comprehensive plan for raising K-12 mathematics and science student
achievement in states, districts and schools.

School Board and Superintendent Team

• Do your district\'s mathematics and science achievement levels compare
favorably to achievement

levels in neighboring districts, states and other countries?

• How many individuals assigned to teach mathematics and science in your
district have a major

or minor in these fields?

• Does your district teacher salary schedule compare favorably to that
of neighboring districts?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Develop a common vision, with input from the community, for promoting
a high level of student achievement in mathematics and science.

• Use accurate data to develop policies that will improve mathematics
and science teaching.

• Commit funding to ensure that all mathematics and science teachers
have ongoing collaborative opportunities to improve their skills and
knowledge.

• Set a target date for hiring only fully certified teachers of
mathematics and science and put in place the policies and programs
necessary to meet the target.

• Aggressively recruit high-quality mathematics and science teachers
from a nationwide pool, including those certified through alternative
pathways (e.g., by offering signing bonuses or giving salary credit for
all previous experience).

• Provide competitive salaries to attract and retain the best-qualified
mathematics and science teachers.

• Establish induction programs to ensure that new mathematics and
science teachers receive the support necessary to be effective.

• Develop mathematics and science teacher leaders who facilitate the
continuous learning of their colleagues.

• Provide administrators and teachers with electronic and other forms of
access to an ever-expanding knowledge base about mathematics and science
teaching.

Principals

• Are you satisfied that the science and mathematics preparation that
your students receive is adequate

preparation for the next level of schooling?

• Are the new teachers that you hire adequately prepared?

• Are your teachers provided with sufficient time to work together to
improve teaching and student learning?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Provide your teachers with significant professional development
opportunities to improve their teaching year-round including in-depth
study through Inquiry Groups with peers, mentors and outside experts and
through Summer Institutes.

• Ensure that teachers and other school staff have electronic and other
forms of access to the ever-expanding knowledge base about mathematics
and science teaching.

• Ensure that new mathematics and science teachers have frequent
interaction with mentor teachers, participate in Inquiry Groups, and
have reasonable teaching loads.

• Should you have no option but to assign an out-of-field teacher, be
certain that a mentor and other ongoing support is available.

• Ensure that opportunities to pursue careers in mathematics and science
teaching are emphasized for students in your school.

Teachers

• Are your student\'s mathematics and science achievement levels on
state and classroom assessments

at an acceptably high level?

• Are you actively seeking to deepen your content knowledge?

• Are you actively seeking to learn new teaching methods for diverse
student learners?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Actively seek new knowledge about teaching in your discipline, work
with your peers on a continuing basis to improve your skills, and take
full advantage of the professional development opportunities offered by
your district and state.

• Actively work to improve your knowledge and skills to incorporate
educational technology into your learning and teaching.

• Communicate to parents the specific standards that students are to
meet at each grade level and update parents on their child\'s progress
in meeting these standards.

• Regularly work with colleagues to compare the achievement level of
your students against the standards in your district and state, identify
areas for improvement, set goals, and make plans for achieving these
goals.

• Actively share your knowledge and experience with new teachers.

Parents

• Do the mathematics and science achievement levels at your child\'s
school compare favorably to achievement levels in neighboring schools?

• Do your child\'s teachers have the necessary background to teach the
courses to which they are assigned?

• How does the teacher salary schedule in your school district compare
to that of neighboring districts?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Learn about the mathematics and science standards that children are
required to meet in your state and get a clear picture of how well your
child\'s school is doing in meeting these standards.

• Support the principal\'s efforts at your child\'s school to hire
well-qualified teachers and to provide them with opportunities to
continually improve their skills.

• Support increased funding for programs that support quality
mathematics and science teaching.

State Leadership

• Do your state\'s mathematics and science achievement levels compare
favorably to achievement

levels in neighboring states?

• How many out-of-field teachers are assigned to teach mathematics and
science across your state?

• How do certification requirements for K-12 mathematics and science
teachers in your state compare

to those of neighboring states and national standards?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Identify the critical professional development needs of the
individuals teaching mathematics and science through a
district-by-district assessment.

• Develop policies and dedicate funding, based on identified needs, to
upgrade content knowledge and improve the skills for all those teaching
mathematics and science, K-12.

• Establish and implement a professional development model that
addresses the specific needs of mathematics and science teachers and
their students through Summer Institutes and Inquiry Groups.

• Establish and enforce high standards for mathematics and science
teachers for initial

and continuing certification.

• Develop career-long incentives and rewards for effective mathematics
and science teachers that encourage them to remain in teaching and to
continually upgrade their skills.

• Establish alternative pathways to teacher certification that encourage
recent college graduates and people with degrees in mathematics and
science to pursue teaching.

Higher Education Institutions

• How do your graduates perform as mathematics and science teachers
after graduation? How does their performance compare to those from other
programs?

• What portion of your mathematics and science education graduates teach
and for how long?

• Do your graduates report that your program prepared them for
successful teaching? Are schools

that hire your graduates satisfied with the quality of their
instruction?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Work closely with area schools to identify existing and future needs
for highly qualified K-12 mathematics and science teachers.

• Ensure that your program meets criteria for exemplary math and science
teacher preparation and actively contribute to the knowledge base in
support of these criteria.

• Collaborate with area school districts to ensure a quality induction
process for new mathematics and science teachers.

• Emphasize recruitment strategies and provide incentives for eligible
students to become science and mathematics teachers.

• Evaluate and track teacher performance following graduation and use
this information to improve

your mathematics and science teacher preparation programs.

Business

• Does your business encourage its employees to work as advocates in the
schools, with the goal

of achieving high-quality mathematics and science education?

• Do your corporate philanthropic priorities help students and educators
meet higher standards

in mathematics and science?

If your answers to any of these questions are at all disquieting, the
following checklist can inform efforts

to promote higher student achievement:

• Work to increase the supply and quality of incoming mathematics and
science teachers by advocating for policies, programs and investments
that will make the teaching profession a more attractive career option.

• \"Lend\" qualified employees to act as part- or full-time teachers in
local schools, without incurring loss of pay or benefits.

• Actively participate in reward and incentive programs that recognize
excellence in mathematics and science teaching in local schools as
measured by improved student achievement.

• Provide support for National Board for Professional Teaching Standards
certification.

• Make regular contributions of time, materials and resources to enhance
instruction in

mathematics and science education in local schools.

*Estimate of Costs in First Year*

Prepared by the U.S. Department of Education Budget Office

Action Strategy Federal State/Local1 Business Public/Private

Goal 1 Needs Assessment 2,3 \$15,340,000 \$7,660,000

Summer Institutes 2,5 \$1,214,000,000 \$606,060,000

Inquiry Groups 2,6 \$1,574,950,000 \$786,300,000

Leadership Training 4 \$112,000,000

Internet Portal \$50,000,000

Coordinating Council \$4,000,000

Rewards Program \$500,000,000

Goal 2 Scholarships (Exemplary Models)7 \$18,000,000

Loan Forgiveness8 \$36,000,000

Academies/Fellows 9,10 \$120,000,000

Goal 3 Induction/Partnerships/Incentives/Salaries To be determined
locally

Sub Total: \$3,140,290,000 \$1,400,020,000 \$500,000,000 \$4,000,000

> Total: \$5,044,310,000

1 There are 56 units nationwide \-- states, territories and Washington,
D.C.

2 Current authorizing legislation for the Eisenhower Professional
Development State Grants (ESEA,IIB) requires that each participating
Local Education Agency match every two dollars of federal funding with
one dollar of its own resources. Such local resources can come from
other federal programs or from non-federal sources. The same ratio is
used here for those Strategies in which it is most appropriate.

3 First year, one time cost.

4 First year, one time cost for 15,000 leaders.

5 One-fifth of the math/science teaching force (340,000 per year)

6 All K-12 math/science teachers (1.7 million)

7 Scholarships offered (1,500/year)

8 Loans offered (6,000/year)

9 Stipends and operating expenses (3,000 Fellow/year)

10. Beginning in second year, an additional \$30,000,000 needed for
    induction programs

    *Endnotes*

1*Report of the National Education Goals Panel*, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Education, 1989.

2T. Husen, *International Study of Student Achievement in Mathematics*,
New York: Wiley, 1967, and C. C. McKnight, *et al*., *The Underachieving
Curriculum: Assessing U.S. School Mathematics from an International
Perspective*, Champaign, Ill.: Stipes, 1987, as cited in James W.
Stigler and James Hiebert, *The Teaching Gap*, New York: The Free Press,
1999, p. 5.

3David Kearns and James Harvey, *A Legacy of Learning*, Washington,
D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000, pp. 29-30. In general science,
American fourth-grade students ranked third among 26 nations; by eighth
grade they were seventeenth among 41 nations; and by twelfth grade they
were tied for eighteenth among 20 nations. In general, the mathematics
pattern is similar. American students were twelfth among 26 nations in
fourth grade, twenty-eighth among 41 nations in eighth grade; and
twelfth-graders were tied for eighteenth among 20 nations. (Students
were not assessed from the same number of nations in all grades.) See
also the U.S. Department of Education, *National Digest of Education
Statistics, 1999*, Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education
Statistics, 1999.

4Kearns and Harvey, *op. cit.*, p. 27.

5Although recent news about the rise in the average mathematics score on
the SAT and the corresponding broadening of the student population
taking the test is welcome, U.S. students remain behind the average
performance level in mathematics attained more than 30 years ago. See
*The Washington Post*, August 31, 2000, p. 1.

6Under Title I legislation that becomes effective in the spring of 2001,
states are required to annually disseminate information, school by
school, on student performance in reading and math. Anticipating the
requirement, all but two states are currently posting at least some
mathematics assessment data on the State Education Agency's (SEA) Web
site; 35 states provide assessment data by specific grade levels and 32
states report mathematics proficiency levels. In science, reporting is
spottier. Thirty-one states report assessment data; 21 states provide
science assessment data by specific grade levels; but only 16 states
report science proficiency levels. For parents, SEA Web addresses can be
readily obtained with a phone call to their local school district.
Information on state assessment data provided by Westat, Inc.,
unpublished tabulations compiled from SEA Web sites, Rockville, Md.,
Sept. 8, 2000.

7*The Wall Street Journal*, "Technology Spurs Economic Expansion,"
January 31, 2000.

8U.S. Department of Labor, "20 Million Jobs: January 1993-November
1999," A Report by the Council of Economic Advisers and the Chief
Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, December 3, 1999, downloaded from
www.dol.gov/\_sec/public/media/reports/20mill/main.htm, March 13, 2000,
as cited in Milton Goldberg and Susan L. Traiman, "Why Business Backs
Education Standards," in Diane Ravitch, ed., *Brookings Papers on
Education Policy*, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2000
(forthcoming).

9*Ibid*.

10*Ibid*.

11*Workforce Economics*, National Alliance of Business, Occasional
Report, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Spring, 2000), pp. 9-11.

12*Ibid*., p. 10.

13Philip R. Day and Robert H. McCabe, "Remedial Education: A Social and
Economic Imperative," AACC Issue Paper, Washington, D.C.: American
Association of Community Colleges, 1997.

14Interview with Robert Gardner, Director of Public Relations,
Association for Manufacturing Technology, June 20, 2000, as cited in
Goldberg and Traiman, *loc. cit*.

15*Training Magazine*, Annual Report, Minneapolis: Bil Communications,
Vol. 36, No. 10 (1999), downloaded from www.trainingsupersite.com.

16Interview with Richard W. Judy, Hudson Institute, Indianapolis, April
19, 2000, as cited in Goldberg and Traiman, *loc. cit*.

17The vision of high-quality teaching in K--12 mathematics and science
is expanded on and operationally defined in three reports that are
currently guiding standards-based science and mathematics education: (1)
American Association for the Advancement of Science, *Benchmarks for
Science Literacy*, New York: Oxford University Press, 1993; (2) National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics, *Principles and Standards for School
Mathematics*, Reston, Va: NCTM, 2000; and (3) National Research Council,
*National Science Education Standards*, Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press, 1996.

18National Research Council, *How Young People Learn*, Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press, 1999.

19Higher Education Research Institute, *The American Freshman: National
Norms for Fall, 1998*, Los Angeles: University of California at Los
Angeles, 1999.

20Linda Darling-Hammond, *What Matters Most: Teaching for America's
Future*, New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future,
1996, Executive Summary.

21Linda Darling-Hammond, "Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A
Review of State Policy Evidence," Teaching Quality Policy Briefs, Number
2 (December, 1999), Washington, D.C.: Center for the Study of Teaching,
downloaded from http://www.depts.washington/edu/ctpmail.

22Linda Darling-Hammond, *Supply, Demand, and Quality in Mathematics and
Science Teaching*. Briefing for the National Commission on Mathematics
and Science Education for the 21st Century, September, 1999.

23National Research Council, *Educating Teachers of Science,
Mathematics, and Technology: New Practices for the New Millennium*,
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000.

24Examples of two states that have produced impressive results by
focusing on better teaching are Texas and North Carolina. In Texas, a
study of grades 1--11 found that teachers' subject-matter expertise
accounted for 40% of the difference on achievement tests. Disparities
between white and minority students were almost entirely accounted for
by the qualifications of their teachers. In North Carolina, students
entered the 1990s near the bottom of the NAEP rankings in mathematics.
After the State boosted minimum salaries, used scholarship programs to
recruit more able students to teaching, invested in better teacher
education curricula, created professional development academies,
instituted mentoring programs for entering teachers, and created
incentives for teachers to be certified by the National Board of
Professional Teaching Standards, North Carolina students now score well
above the NAEP averages. See "Who Should Teach?" *Education Week*,
January 13, 2000.

25Linda Darling-Hammond, "Supply, Demand, and Quality in Mathematics and
Science Teaching."

26*Ibid*.

27*Ibid*.

28Richard M. Ingersoll, "Turnover Among Mathematics and Science Teachers
in the U.S.," Study Paper prepared for the National Commission on
Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Washington, D.C.,
September 12, 1999; and Urban Teacher Collaborative, *The Urban Teacher
Challenge: Teacher Demand and Supply in the Great City Schools*,
Washington, D.C.: Council of Great City Schools, January, 2000.

29Steve Olson, "Candid Camera," *TEACHER MAGAZINE on the WEB*, May/June,
1999. Videotape, "Eighth- Grade Mathematics Lessons: United States,
Japan, and Germany," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education,
1999, produced by Nancy Seago.

30James W. Stigler, Briefing for the National Commission on Mathematics
and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Washington, D.C., September
23, 1999, pp. 23 and 19 of the transcript.

31Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication, Directorate for
Education and Human Resources, *Indicators of Science and Mathematics
Education, 1995*, Arlington, Va.: National Science Foundation, 1996.

32*National Science Teachers Association Reports*, "Survey Indicates
High Teacher Turnover, Job Dissatisfaction," Arlington, Va.: National
Science Teachers Association, 2000, downloaded from
http://www.nsta.org/reports/00jun2.asp.

33*The Urban Teacher Challenge: Teacher Demand in the Great City
Schools, 2000*, Washington, D.C.: Council of Great City Schools, 2000,
pp. 9-11.

34Estimates based on projected fall 1999 counts of teachers and
proportions from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey, 1993-94; and Fast
Response Survey, "Teacher Survey on Professional Development and
Training."

35National Research Council, *op. cit*.

36Emily C Feistritzer and David T. Chester. *Alternative Teacher
Certification: A State-by-State Analysis 1998-99*. Washington, D.C.:
National Center for Education Information, p. 6, downloaded from
http://www.ncei.com/Alt-Teacher-Cert.htm . Alternative routes for
preparing and licensing science and mathematics teachers provide ways to
attract large numbers of highly educated and life-experienced adults who
have the talent and enthusiasm to teach.

37Susan Sclafani, "Comparisons of Alternative Certification Program,
Teach for America, and Certified Teachers in the Houston Independent
School District," Briefing for the National Commission on Mathematics
and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Washington, D.C., May, 2000.
The Houston Independent School district has found that the students of
teachers certified through the Alternative Certification Program
performed just as well as, or better than, students of teachers trained
through traditional teacher preparation programs. Also, the retention
rate of the alternatively certified teachers five years later was
significantly higher.

38James W. Stigler and James Hiebert, *The Teaching Gap*, New York: The
Free Press, 1999, pp. 170-71.

39Richard M. Ingersoll, *loc. cit*., p.5.

40*Ibid*., Figure 4, p.7.

41*Ibid*., Table 1, p.6.

42*Ibid*.

43The Commission recognizes that the action steps recommended here
could---and should---be made for all teachers, not just teachers of
mathematics and science. But the need for improving the professional
environment of mathematics and science teachers is particularly acute
because of their shortage, and because of the salaries degree holders in
these fields can command in the private sector.

44Adam Urbanski and Roger Erskine, "School Reform, TURN, and Teacher
Compensation," *Phi Delta Kappan*, January, 2000, pp. 367-70. The
Teacher Union Reform Network (TURN), composed of local school districts
and the local affiliates of the AFT and the NEA, is a labor/management
collaboration that rewards teachers who obtain certification by the
National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). Participating
teachers receive support for NBPTS fees or are granted special standing
as mentors or lead teachers. Nine TURN locals provide bonuses, salary
supplements for certification, or additional pay for teachers who act as
mentors. In addition, the Consortium for Policy Research in Education
has identified 15 States and 20 districts that offer financial rewards
to teachers who obtain NBPTS certification. Teachers are generally
provided with one-time rewards ranging from \$2,000 to \$10,000, and
annual salary supplements ranging from \$500 to \$10,000 per year or
from 1% to 12% of their base salary per year (see
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/cpre/teachercomp/reform/nbtpspay.thm).

45Steven Greenhouse, "Teachers' Pay: Adding Up the Impact of Raising
Salaries," *The New York Times*,

August 9, 1999.

46Ann Bradley, "High Tech Fields Luring Teachers from Education,"
*Education Week*, January 19, 2000. Indeed, the average annual teacher
salary is only "a fraction of the annual bonus received by many
thirty-somethings on Wall Street." Greenhouse, *loc. cit*.

*Charter*

AUTHORITY

The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st
Century, (Commission) is established by the Secretary of Education and
is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) (P. L. 92-463, as amended; 5 U.S.C.A. Appendix 2).

PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS

The Office of the Under Secretary serves as the principal advisor to the
Secretary by directing, coordinating, and recommending Department
policy. Therefore, the Commission has been established in this office
for the purpose of: (1) reviewing the current state of American K-12
mathematics and science education with a focus on the challenges of
teacher recruitment, preparation, retention, and professional growth and
(2) articulating the steps needed to strengthen the classroom practice
of math and science teachers. The Commission would produce a report
describing specific action steps that federal, state, and local
policymakers can take to address math and science teacher supply and
quality issues.

STRUCTURE

The Commission will be composed of not more than twenty-five members.
Members shall be appointed from, but not limited to, the following
groups: current or recent members of Congress, Governors, Mayors, State
Legislators, Chief State School Officers, Nobel laureates, CEOs,
teachers, University presidents, principals, parents, students, public
representatives, and other distinguished leaders in the fields of
mathematics and science. Ex officio, non-voting members, of the
Commission, include the Secretary of Education or his designee, the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of
Transportation, the NASA Administrator, the Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy, the Director of the National Science
Foundation, and the President of the National Academy of Sciences.

Members shall be appointed by the Secretary for the duration of the
Commission.. Any vacancy in the Commission shall not affect its powers,
but shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment. The
Secretary shall designate a member of the Commission to serve as the
chairperson.

The Under Secretary names the Designated Federal Official (DFO) to the
Commission.

MEETINGS

The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairperson, with the
concurrence of the Designated Federal Official or designee who is
present at all meetings. The Commission shall meet at least four times,
or more frequently, as may be necessary to carry out the Commission's
responsibilities. Meetings are open to the public except as may be
determined otherwise by the Under Secretary in accordance with Section
10(d) of the FACA. Adequate public notification will be given in advance
of each meeting. Meetings will be conducted and records of the
proceedings kept, as required by applicable laws.

A quorum of the Commission consists of a majority of the authorized
members.

ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST

Members will serve without compensation. However, members may each
receive reimbursement for travel expenses incident to attending
Commission meetings, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as
authorized by the Federal travel regulations. Funds will be provided by
the Department of Education to administer the Commission. The estimated
annual person-years of staff support is: two (2) FTE. An estimated
budget of \$800,000 over two fiscal years has been allotted for this
Commission.

REPORTS

Not later than September 30, 2000, the Commission shall submit a report
to the Secretary that contains a detailed statement of the findings and
conclusions resulting from the study, together with the Commission's
recommendations. The Secretary will then submit the report to the
President and Congress together with the recommendations of the
Commission.

TERMINATION

The Commission shall terminate 90 days after the date on which the
Commission submits its report to the Secretary.

The Commission is hereby chartered in accordance with Section 14(b) of
FACA. This charter expires two years from the date of filing.

APPROVED:

August 12, 1999

Richard W. Riley, Secretary of Education

Establishment date: March 23, 1999

Filing date: April 6, 1999

*Acknowledgments*

The Commission wishes to express its deep gratitude to the many
individuals and organizations without whose work our own labors would
have been far more difficult and far less productive.

We owe, first, an enduring debt to the Commission staff. Under the able
leadership of Executive Director Linda P. Rosen, they worked long hours
to organize and manage our several meetings, keep the flow of
communication moving, prepare extensive and invaluable briefing books,
handle travel and logistical arrangements, and attend faithfully to the
myriad details that are never noticed because they are never left
undone. Beyond all these very necessary tasks, however, the staff ably
contributed in substantive ways to our discussions and our final report.
Thanks are due to John M. Luczak, Nancy Hawthorne Mumaw, Jamila A.
Rattler, Jan Solomon, Rebekah Song, and Emmett L. Wright for their
excellent work.

Bruce O. Boston of Wordsmith, Inc., served as the eloquent writer/editor
of Before It's Too Late, building on earlier substantive work by Steve
Olson and Amy Kaslow.

RCW Communications Design, Inc., created the report's layout and design
and ably guided it through the production process.

A number of individuals provided support to the members and ex officio
members of the Commission, attending meetings in their stead when
necessary and contributing to the Commission's discussions. Our thanks
are due them for helping to keep lines of communication open. They were:
V.J. Ajarwal, Arthur Bienenstock, Brian Branton, Laura Chow, Kelley S.
Coyner, Kate Dickens, Carlene Ellis, Peter Faletra, Karen Garr, Alice
Gill, Ken Griffin, Susan Hattan, Kathy Havens, Jay Labov, Frank Owens,
Danica Petroshius, Joan Rothenberg, Richard Stoddard, Lisa Towne, and
Judith Sunley. Also deserving thanks are Edward T. Esty and Judy
Wurtzel, whose advice and counsel were of great assistance. And, the
extra hands offered by Anthony Ashton, Seth Fenton, and Wendy Goldstein
were invaluable in expediting the work.

The Commission's deliberations were greatly informed by the wisdom of
many experts. These stimulating views were shared with us through
commissioned papers and presentations. Commissioned paper authors
included Richard Ingersoll; Edward Britton, Senta Raizen, Lynn Paine,
and Mary Ann Huntley; Beatriz Chu Clewell and Laurie B. Forcier; as well
as Brian Lord and Barbara Miller. Presenters included Dennis Bartels,
Barnett Berry, Barbara Blumenthal, Barbara Cervone, Cindy Chapman, Susan
Collins, Linda Darling-Hammond, Richard Elmore, William Firestone,
Thomas Gillett, Gary Hart, Janice Jackson, Carolyn Kelley, Michael Lach,
Donald Langenberg, Michal Lomask, Susan Loucks-Horsley, Iris Metts, Tom
Payzant, Susan Sclafani, Nanette Seago, Gail Shroyer, Elliot Solloway,
James W. Stigler, Uri Treisman, John Vaille, and Suzanne Wilson.

Finally, our thanks are due to Battelle, the Disney Learning
Partnership, and Texas Instruments, who provided considerable support to
the Commission's work; and to Jennifer House and Lillian Israel of the
Association for Computing Machinery for organizing an engaging and
informative demonstration of learning technology for us.

September 2000

The text of this document is in the public domain. Feel free to
photocopy or reprint this document.

To order copies of this report, write:

ED Pubs

Education Publications Center

U.S. Department of Education

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

Fax: 301-470-1244

E-mail: edpubs@inet.ed.gov

You may also order toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877
service is not yet available in your area, call 1-800-872-5327
(1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY) should call

1-800-437-0833.

To order online, point your Internet browser to:

www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html

This report is also available on the Commission\'s Web site at:

www.ed.gov/americacounts/glenn

On request, this publication is available in alternative formats, such
as Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette. For more
information, please contact the Department\'s Alternate Format Center at
202-205-8113.

For more information, please contact us at:

U.S. Department of Education

The National Commission on Mathematics and Science

Teaching for the 21st Century

400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20202-8200

E-mail: america_counts@ed.gov

Telephone: 1-877-220-9684

NOTICE:

This document contains examples of programs created by public and
private organizations. They are provided for the reader\'s information
and their inclusion is not intended as an endorsement by the U.S.
Department of Education