Title  : NSF93-64 Partners in Progress: The Role of Professional Societies in
         Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education.
Type   : Report
NSF Org: EHR
Date   : April 1, 1993
File   : nsf9364

Telephonic Device for the Deaf
      The National Science Foundation has a Telephonic Device for the Deaf 
      (TDD) capability which enables individuals with hearing impairment to 
      communicate with theDivision of Personnel and Management for information 
      relating to NSF programs, employment, or general information.  This 
      number is (202) 357-7492.

Electronic Dissemination
      You can get information fast through STIS (Science and Technology 
      Information System), NSF's online publishing system, described in the 
      "STIS Flyer" at the end of this document.

Ordering by Electronic Dissemination
      If you have access to either Internet of Bitnet, you may order 
      publications electronically.  Internet users should send requests to 
      pubs@NSF.gov.  Bitnet users should address requests to pubs@NSF.  In your 
      request, include the NSF publication number and title, number of copies, 
      and your name and complete mailing address.  Printed publications also 
      may be ordered by FAX (703-644-4278).  Publications should be received 
      within 3 weeks after receipt of request.

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

DIRECTORATE FOR EDUCATION AND HUMAN
RESOURCES

April 1, 1993

Dr. Walter Massey
Director
National Science Foundation
Washington, DC 20550

Dear Walter:

I am pleased to submit the report of the National Science Foundation workshop 
on the role of professional societies in science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics education in two-year colleges.  The workshop was developed with 
leadership of the Division of Undergraduate Education and with involvement of 
all the divisions in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources.

On October 29-30, 1992 seventy-four scientists, engineers, and mathematicians, 
representing twenty-four professional societies, met to encourage the 
partnership of two-year colleges and professional societies in science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics education.  Participants included 
two-year, four-year, and university faculty as well as staff from professional 
societies and NSF.  Over a two day period, they worked in both 
interdisciplinary and discipline-based groups to develop recommendations that 
provide a basis for future activities and projects designed to inform the 
general membership of professional societies about two-year colleges, support 
initiatives to improve education in the first two years of college, and help to 
develop and promote two-year college leaders and spokespersons. Through their 
joint efforts and leadership, and with support of NSF and others, these 
partners can improve the quality of education for an important segment of our 
population.

                              Sincerely,

                              Luther S. Williams
                              Assistant Director

Letter of Transmittal

April 1, 1993

Dr. Luther S. Williams, Assistant Director
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
National Science Foundation
Washington, DC 20550

Dear Dr. Williams:

We are pleased to forward to you the report  of the National Science Foundation 
workshop, Partners in Progress: The Role of Professional Societies in Science, 
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education.  The focus of this 
workshop, held October 29-30, 1992, was strategies to enhance the relationship 
between professional scientific societies and two-year college and lower 
division science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. The 
seventy-four workshop participants represented twenty-four professional 
societies.  They produced two sets of recommendations, one addressing a series 
of issues raised by conference planners and the other directed toward 
professional societies.

With the assistance of the planning committee and NSF staff members, 
participants received assignments prior to the workshop designed to stimulate 
their thinking. Each of five interdisciplinary working groups addressed a 
preassigned topic:

       Professional society actions to support the integrated teacher/scholar 
       role of lower division science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
       faculty.

       Professional society actions to encourage the formation of networks 
       among two-year college leaders from scientific, engineering, and 
       mathematics organizations.

       Professional society actions to promote membership and leadership in 
       professional organizations by two-year college faculty.

       Professional society services to enhance lower division science, 
       technology, engineering, and mathematics education, particularly those 
       directed to two-year college faculty.

       Professional society roles in developing initiatives to increase the 
       number and improve the quality of proposals from two-year college 
       faculty to NSF and other funding agencies.

Participants also worked in discipline-based groups to map out strategies and 
develop specific activities to enhance the relationship between professional 
societies and their two-year college and lower-division members.

This report has been reviewed by members of the Planning Committee, the chairs 
and recorders of the five interdisciplinary groups, and the chairs of the eight 
discipline-based groups.  We now submit it to NSF in the spirit of cooperation, 
collaboration, and mutual optimism for the future of science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics education.  We encourage NSF, in concert with 
discipline-based professional organizations and other national associations, to 
take a leadership role in implementing the recommendations of the report.

On behalf of all participants of the workshop, we extend to you and to Dr. 
Robert Watson, Dr. Elizabeth Teles, and Dr. John Clevenger of the Division of 
Undergraduate Education, our deepest appreciation for your support of this 
endeavor.  Your continued commitment to undergraduate education programs and 
your recognition of the significant contribution made by two-year colleges is 
applauded by the education community.

Sincerely,

James H. Stith                                                            Susan 
Forman Workshop Co-Chair                                                  
Workshop Co-Chair

FOREWORD

In March 1986, the National Science Board (NSB) released its report 
Undergraduate Science, Mathematics and Engineering Education (NSB 86-100), the 
outcome of a year-long study conducted by the NSB Task Committee on 
Undergraduate Science and Engineering Education.  The report identified serious 
problem areas in U.S. undergraduate education and included recommendations to 
improve the quality of science, mathematics, and engineering programs at 
two-year colleges.

In response to the NSB report, the National Science Foundation (NSF) took steps 
to develop and implement new programs in undergraduate education.  Recognizing 
the critical role of two-year colleges, NSF convened a workshop in 1988 to 
obtain a better understanding of the conditions and problems in these 
institutions.  The report, NSF Workshop on Science, Engineering, and 
Mathematics Education in Two-Year Colleges (NSF 89-50),  was the stimulus for 
meetings, inquiries, and studies by a variety of individuals and organizations. 
Reports of these studies, as well as suggestions from professional 
organizations, served as valuable resources for a subsequent workshop in May 
1991.  The report of that workshop, Matching Actions and Challenges (NSF 
91-111), contained recommendations directed to two-year college faculty, 
professional organizations, and college administrators that would improve 
relationships and foster interactions among the organizations, the faculty, and 
federal funding agencies.  Discipline-based professional organizations were 
specifically recognized as occupying a unique position from which to support 
innovation and disseminate information.  Matching Actions and Challenges 
recommends that professional societies assume a leadership role in the 
initiation and development of a new vision of the lower division undergraduate 
curriculum that capitalizes on the critical role of two-year colleges.

Building on past workshops and studies, NSF convened the present workshop. 
Seventy-four scientists, engineers, and mathematicians represented twenty-four 
professional societies.  Participants included two-year, four-year, and 
university faculty as well as staff from professional societies and NSF.  Over 
a two day period, they worked in both interdisciplinary and discipline-based 
groups to develop recommendations that provide a basis for future activities 
and projects designed to inform the general membership of professional 
societies about two-year colleges, support initiatives to improve education in 
the first two years of college, and help to develop and promote two-year 
college leaders and spokespersons.

The opinions expressed in this report are those of the workshop participants 
and do not represent NSF policy.  The recommendations are currently under 
review by NSF.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

     Letter from Luther S. Williams 
..............................................................  i

     Letter of Transmittal 
............................................................................. 
ii

     Foreword 
...............
............................................................................. 
iv

     Introduction 
...................
....................................................................... 2

     Recommendations/Interdisciplinary Working Groups 
.............................

     "Where Do We Go From Here?"
          Plenary Address, James H. Stith 
          ...................................................

     Recommendations/Disciplinary Working Groups 
...................................

     "Two-Year College Mission and Students"
          Plenary Address, George R. Boggs  
          ......................................

     "Two-Year Colleges and the Scientific Literacy
     of the American People"
          Comments, Benjamin S. Shen, National Science Board ...........

     Participants 
...................
........................................................................

     NSF Presenters and Planning Committee 
................................................

     Participating Professional Societies 
.........................................................

     Epilogue 
...............
................
..................................................................

     Back Cover:     Two-Year Colleges 
.........................................................

INTRODUCTION

On October 29 - 30, 1992, the National Science Foundation sponsored a workshop, 
Partners in Progress, to address the relationship between professional 
scientific societies and community college and lower-division science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education.  Seventy-four 
scientists, engineers, and mathematicians represented twenty-four professional 
societies.  Participants included two-year, four-year, and university faculty 
as well as staff from professional socieities and NSF.  Over the two days, they 
worked in both interdisciplinary and discipline-based groups to develop 
recommendations that provide a basis for future activities and projects 
designed to inform the general membership of professional societies about 
two-year colleges, support initiatives to improve education in the first two 
years of college, and help to develop and promote two-year college leaders and 
spokespersons.

BACKGROUND

This workshop was planned as a follow-up to a previous NSF workshop, Matching 
Actions and Challenges, held in May 1991.  At that time, NSF brought together a 
group of two-year college science, engineering, and mathematics faculty, 
administrators, university representatives, and representatives from business 
and industry to consider actions that could be taken to reaffirm the important 
role that two-year colleges play in the education of the nation's 
undergraduates.  The result of the workshop was a series of recommendations 
directed to four specific audiences:  (1)  faculty and discipline-based 
professional organizations, (2) two-year college presidents and administrators, 
(3)  non-federal agencies, boards, and other funding sources, and (4) NSF and 
other federal agencies.

The goal of the 1992 workshop was to develop strategies to implement the 
recommendations that came out of the 1991 workshop.  These recommendations 
stated that professional societies should:

       Assume a leadership role in the initiation and development of a new 
       vision of lower- division undergraduate curriculum;

       Design programs to recruit and involve faculty from two-year colleges 
       and other institutions whose primary mission is undergraduate 
       education;

       Assist NSF and other appropriate granting agencies by providing updated 
       lists of interested and qualified reviewers; and

       Establish grant committees whose charge is to encourage, lead, and 
       coordinate grant application efforts that reflect the diversity of 
       two-year college students.

Prior to the meeting, the professional societies sent information to NSF about 
their activities in lower-division undergraduate education that workshop 
planners used to assess where we are now and to think about new areas in which 
initiatives might be developed.  Society activities described at the plenary 
session included:

       Publishing journals that focus on content and pedagogy in science, 
       technology, engineering, and mathematics education.  Two-year college 
       faculty are frequent contributors to these journals.

       Developing and publishing documents and reports of particular interest 
       to two-year college faculty.

       Ensuring representation from two-year colleges on executive committees 
       and governing boards.

       Establishing committees that address the concerns of two-year colleges.

       Holding special sessions and workshops at national and local meetings 
       focusing on two-year college and lower division science, technology, 
       engineering, and mathematics  education.

       Undertaking major initiatives involving two-year colleges.

The American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges (AMATYC) is an 
example of a scientific association whose primary constituency is two-year 
college faculty.  It offers its members a full range of services.  It holds 
summer institutes and annual meetings and sponsors a Student Math League.  
Every two years, AMATYC presents the Mathematics Excellence Award to an 
educator who has made outstanding contributions to mathematics or mathematics 
education at any level.  Its regular publications are The AMATYC Review and 
AMATYC News, and it is in the process of completing three major documents:  a 
strategic plan; guidelines for mathematics departments at two-year colleges; 
and guidelines for the academic preparation of mathematics faculty at two-year 
colleges.

THE WORKSHOP

The format of the workshop was designed to give participants opportunities to 
think about broad issues as well as strategies for their own disciplines.  Each 
interdisciplinary group addressed one of the following five key issues, which 
gave structure and substance to the proceedings.

       Professional society actions to support the integrated teacher/scholar 
       role of lower division science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
       faculty.

       Professional society actions to encourage the formation of networks 
       among two-year college leaders from scientific, engineering, and 
       mathematics organizations.

       Professional society actions to promote membership and leadership in 
       professional organizations by two-year college faculty.

       Professional society services to enhance lower division science, 
       technology, engineering, and mathematics education, particularly those 
       directed to two-year college faculty.

       Professional society roles in developing initiatives to increase the 
       number and improve the quality of proposals from two-year college 
       faculty to NSF and other funding agencies.

After hearing preliminary recommendations from the interdisciplinary groups, 
participants met with others in their discipline to discuss actions that 
professional societies they represented might take.  They met in working groups 
in astronomy, chemistry, earth sciences, engineering and engineering 
technology, life sciences, mathematics and physics.  These groups made specific 
recommendations relevant to these disciplines and prepared the groundwork for 
presentation of these recommendations to their respective societies.

On the second day of the workshop, additional representatives from the 
professional societies and the National Science Foundation were invited to hear 
the final recommendations from the interdisciplinary groups.  They were then 
asked to meet with others in their disciplines to discuss and plan activities 
the individual professional societies might undertake in response to the 
recommendations.

The remaining portions of this document describe in detail the recommendations 
from both the interdisciplinary and discipline-based working groups.

CLOSING

The atmosphere throughout the conference was that this is an extremely 
important time for two-year colleges.  Two-year colleges must plan jointly with 
four-year colleges, universities, and professional societies on ways to enhance 
the role of two-year colleges in improving undergraduate education.  No one 
group can do it alone; all must cooperate.  Working together, the educational 
community can improve the quality and effectiveness of science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics education at all levels.  With continued support 
from the National Science Foundation and other organizations that share this 
vision, our nation will remain a leader in the world marketplace and meet the 
challenges of the future.

 Working
 Group A:

Professional Society Actions to Support the Integrated Teacher/Scholar Role of 
Lower Division Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty

Questions regarding faculty roles and rewards have been raised throughout the 
postsecondary community.  Professional societies need to consider carefully how 
they can contribute their support to strengthening science, engineering, 
mathematics, and technical education by validating their members' work in 
improving instruction and curriculum development at all levels.

Fundamental to the following recommendations is an understanding of the role of 
scholarship in two-year colleges.  The definition of activities which are 
considered scholarly must be broadened and diversified.  In addition to 
research in one's discipline, scholarship includes but is not limited to 
engagement in professional development activities, research on the learning 
process, and development of instructional materials.  The primary objective of 
scholarship in two-year colleges is to enhance teaching effectiveness apropos 
their missions:  transfer programs, technical education, life-long learning, 
and public outreach.

Societies should:

       Sponsor sessions and workshops at national and regional meetings that 
       present ways two-year college faculty can participate in scholarly 
       activities.

       Include articles by two-year college faculty on scholarly activities of 
       the type described above in new or existing publications.

       Publicize the existence of model programs at two-year colleges.

       Collect baseline data on the current state of scholarship in two-year 
       colleges.

       Communicate to two-year college administrators the importance of 
       recognizing, rewarding, and supporting faculty involvement in scholarly 
       activities and providing release time and other resources for such 
       activities.

       Promote exchanges of personnel and resources between two-year colleges 
       and four-year colleges/universities and between two-year colleges and 
       business and industry.

       Include two-year college faculty on committees and task forces concerned 
       with scholarship issues.

 Working
 Group B:

Professional Society Actions to Encourage the Formation of Networks Among 
Two-Year College Leaders from Scientific, Engineering, and Mathematics 
Organizations

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics are closely linked 
disciplines and share complementary issues and concerns with respect to lower 
division education.  By learning more about what others are doing and building 
on mutual efforts, two-year faculty can have a stronger impact on reform in 
what is taught and how it is taught. Actions must be taken by societies to 
create better communication and networking by faculty in the same discipline 
and across disciplines.  Interdisciplinary projects can play a major role in 
reforming science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education.  By 
taking the initiative in forming strong networks, two-year college faculty can 
play a leadership role in the educational community by demonstrating ways in 
which coalitions can be used to strengthen undergraduate education.

Within disciplines, societies should:

       Publish a membership list that identifies faculty by institution.

       Establish a network among  members to exchange information about and to 
       make presentations on two-year college science, technology, engineering, 
       and mathematics issues at the national and regional level.

Across disciplines, societies should:

       Develop, maintain, and disseminate  a database of two-year college 
       science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty, including 
       those in developmental skills departments

       Invite two-year college science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics faculty from other disciplines to make presentations at 
       regional and national meetings.

       Assist in the formation of networks among leaders in two-year college 
       science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education.

       Take the lead in promoting electronic communication among two-year 
       college science, technology, engineering, and mathematics faculty.

       Establish an interdisciplinary two-year college consulting service to 
       assist departments and programs in enhancing science, technology, 
       engineering, and mathematics education.

       Encourage networking and collaborative efforts between faculty, 
       disciplines, and organizations in order to increase the quality and 
       number of grants by bringing people together to share ideas and by 
       providing a mechanism for the ongoing exchange of ideas via conferences 
       and electronic communication.

 Working
 Group C:

Professional Society Actions to Promote Membership and Leadership in 
Professional Organizations by Two-Year College Faculty

There are numerous misconceptions about the roles and missions of two-year 
colleges, and faculty at these institutions are often not regarded as equal 
players in postsecondary education.  Professional societies must address these 
issues and play a role in informing the higher education community about 
two-year colleges.

In spite of the fact that they play a pivotal role in the educational process, 
many faculty who teach science, technology, engineering, and mathematics at 
two-year colleges do not belong to nor participate actively in professional 
societies.  Yet there are important roles they can play in professional 
societies, especially in areas that touch on issues central to the discipline 
such as instruction and curriculum development and the state of the 
profession.

Societies should:

       Encourage two-year college faculty to participate in governance 
       structures, strategic planning processes, and appropriate formal 
       committees by such means as including them on nominating committees, 
       developing a ladder for advancement into leadership positions, and 
       providing for a flow of new talent to executive and other committees 
       through aggressive outreach.

       Establish and promote a committee (or other            appropriate 
       division) devoted to the promotion of excellence in teaching.

       Include two-year college faculty on program committees to help ensure 
       that programs at local, regional, and national meetings contain sessions 
       of interest to lower division science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics faculty.

       Inform two-year college administrators about the need to include 
       two-year college faculty's activities and leadership roles in 
       professional societies as part of consideration of applications for 
       tenure, promotion, and other rewards.

       Use local and regional sections or chapters to recruit new members, 
       stimulate active participation by two-year college faculty, and provide 
       additional opportunities for leadership development.

       Develop leadership among two-year college faculty for the purpose of 
       informing political leaders as well as the public about two-year college 
       issues and concerns.

 Working
 Group D:

Professional Society Services to Enhance Lower Division Science, Technology, 
Engineering, and Mathematics Education, Particularly Those Directed to Two-Year 
College Faculty

In view of the importance of lower division science, technology, engineering, 
and mathematics education and the fact that more than twenty-seven percent of 
all undergraduates are enrolled in two-year institutions, it is critical that 
two-year college faculty take a partnership role in lower division curricular 
and pedagogical reform. Professional societies can serve as a conduit for the 
exchange of ideas and the dissemination of successful teaching strategies and 
techniques as well as the implementation of curriculum reform appropriate to 
lower division science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education.  
Because of the emphasis on teaching at two-year colleges, their faculty  
members have much to offer to the higher education community, especially in 
finding innovative ways to work with diverse groups and non-traditional 
students.

Societies should:

       Publicize the importance of two-year colleges in science, technology, 
       engineering, and mathematics education.

       Provide awards that recognize meritorious teaching in lower-division 
       science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education.

       Form committees to address lower-division science, technology, 
       engineering, and mathematics issues and concerns.

       Promote equity in and access to science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics education for all students.

       Advocate the need to experiment with different teaching styles and 
       respect diversity in learning styles.

       Develop, publish, promote, and disseminate guidelines, recommendations, 
       and resources for the purpose of improving the quality of education in 
       science, technology, engineering, and technology in two-year colleges.

       Encourage the interaction of two-year college science, technology, 
       engineering, and mathematics faculty with business, industry, and 
       government.

       Seek input from two-year college faculty and administrators on issues 
       that impact lower division science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics education.

       Work with accrediting agencies on issues related to quality of programs 
       in two-year colleges.

 Working
 Group E:

Professional Society Roles in Developing Initiatives to Increase the Number and 
Improve the Quality of Proposals from Two-Year College Faculty to NSF and Other 
Funding Agencies

In the academic world, an important way to gain greater visibility and respect 
is by obtaining grants.  Opportunities open to awardees can be used to 
highlight work of two-year college faculty, give them enhanced status in the 
academic community, and provide a forum in which to inform other members of the 
higher education community about two-year colleges. Professional societies need 
to play a major role in the development of initiatives to increase the number 
and improve the quality of proposals from two-year college faculty. Activities 
supported by grants benefit students, faculty,  institutions, and the greater 
communities.

Societies should:

       Showcase successful two-year college programs and projects at national 
       and regional meetings as well as in newsletters and other publications.

       Sponsor workshops on funding opportunities and proposal preparation.

       Advocate that institutions provide suitable recognition and rewards for 
       developing and writing proposals (e.g., release time, travel, summer 
       support).

       Encourage funding agencies to provide significant additional resources 
       to address the needs and concerns of two-year colleges.

       Submit annually names and vitae of qualified two-year faculty reviewers 
       to funding agencies.

       Encourage NSF and other funding agencies to:

       Establish interdisciplinary panels of two-year college representatives 
       to provide information on science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics issues in two-year colleges.

       Continue and expand the use of two-year college representatives on 
       Advisory Boards and Review Panels.

       Develop and disseminate timely and pertinent information on funding 
       opportunities for two-year colleges.

       Employ program directors with two-year college experience.

       Establish a pre-proposal review process for preliminary review of 
       proposals if one does not exist.

       Utilize two-year college leaders in developing future agendas as they 
       relate to lower division science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics education.

 WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

Plenary Address
James Stith, Workshop Co-Chair

     We have met here to discuss "The role of professional societies in 
two-year college science, technology, engineering and mathematics education."  
The issue, in my view, is a broader one.  We are not suggesting that the 
two-year college community is in need of handouts.  Nor are we suggesting that 
it must be given resources in order to become full participating partners in 
the overall educational society.

     We are really saying that professional societies need to recognize the 
large and significant role the two-year community plays in educating America's 
youth. We can no longer afford not to have their programs fully integrated and 
recognized.

     We have all heard the statistics.  As a matter of fact, we have heard them 
so often that perhaps the impact of their numbers is lost in the sea of 
familiarity.  Let me take the risk of repeating some of them again.

       Roughly half of the nation's college freshmen, both full and part time, 
       are enrolled in two-year colleges.

       Twelve percent of all physics B.S. degree recipients transferred from 
       two-year colleges.

       In 1990 two-year colleges enrolled forty-three percent of all students 
       taking undergraduate mathematics courses, up from thirty-two percent in 
       1970.

Similar claims can be made for earth sciences, biology, and chemistry.

          In spite of the monumental teaching loads carried by two-year 
          faculty,  their contributions to society and to the furtherance of 
          their discipline all too often are not recognized by their four-year 
          and university faculty colleagues.  Even more disturbing is that 
          their  contributions are not recognized by their deans or presidents. 
          Additionally, there is growing evidence that many of the scientific 
          societies to which these teachers belong are not aware of their 
          contributions.

     For too many years, we have viewed the two-year college as a place for 
high school graduates who possessed neither the grades nor the test scores to 
get into the four-year college of their choice. It was thought that most of 
these students would get their associate's degree and enter the job market.  A 
few of the better students would transfer to a four-year institution.  There is 
increasing evidence that in today's economic downturn, many students who had 
here-to-fore gone to four-year institutions are discovering the two-year 
college offers an appealing option. They find in those institutions instructors 
who are dedicated to teaching, and who are genuinely interested in their 
students.

     As a case in point, The Middletown Record, the local paper in my home 
town, had a recent front page article reporting that the annex of the local 
two-year college was running out of space.  This story helps to illustrate what 
has become a growing trend.  When it comes to getting started on the road to a 
degree in science or mathematics, the four-year college is no longer a 
necessity, it is just another opportunity.

     Our discussions over the past one and a half days have been extremely 
fruitful and focused.  As I walked around to the different discussion groups 
and listened to reports in plenary sessions, I could not help but hear in those 
discussions a sense of frustration.  Yet,  I have also detected a real sense of 
optimism.  A theme that kept coming through is that by working with the 
societies and getting our colleagues more involved, we can build a stronger 
coalition with the four-year community.

     What have been some of the key points of our discussions? One is that we 
must broaden the definition of scholarship within the math/science community.  
As that definition is refined, there must be open communication with two-year 
institutions.  We are reminded that this broadened definition is not just for 
the benefit of the two-year college community, but for the entire teaching 
community.

     In May 1991, the NSF Workshop on Science, Engineering, and Mathematics 
Education in Two-Year Colleges stated:  "the education community can and must 
improve the quality and effectiveness of instruction in mathematics, science, 
engineering, and technology programs."   If the quality of teaching in 
classrooms all over this country is to improve, then teaching as a profession 
must be valued by all members of society, especially by those in positions to 
make major decisions.

     A concern raised in several of the working groups has been the sense of 
isolation experienced by many faculty at two-year colleges.  Many departments 
have only a single faculty member teaching in a particular discipline. In fact, 
an informal survey by a member of the two-year physics community found that 67% 
of the two-year physics faculty responding to her survey were the single 
faculty member teaching physics at those institutions.   A strong 
recommendation from several groups is that professional societies must 
establish networks to help eliminate that feeling of isolation.  Another 
recommendation is that societies should develop a database of two-year faculty, 
indicating those who are available to lend assistance.

     Deans and college presidents must be sensitive to the importance for all 
faculty, not just two-year faculty, to participate in professional meetings and 
conferences. Professional societies must continue to develop guidelines and 
promote standards and  practices that improve the quality of life for all 
faculty and students. We must pay as much attention to faculty development as 
we do to student development.  If we expect to reap the rewards of good 
teaching, we must be willing to make an investment in it.

    The call for an emphasis on excellence in teaching has been eloquent and 
vocal.  We must help to establish standards that limit the maximum number of 
contact hours per semester.  I keep hearing horror stories of instructors 
having as many as 27 contact hours per week.   By no stretch of the imagination 
can this result in good teaching.  At best, teachers in this situation can only 
hope to survive.

     Another strong message that came through is that two-year college faculty 
must be involved in society governance and strategic planning.  Too many 
societies have never had members from two-year institutions in key positions of 
leadership and decision making, i.e., president or board member.  Two-year 
faculty are often not considered for major awards of the society, nor are there 
awards designated for them.  The time has come, no it is past due, for a change 
in business as usual!

      Professional societies must continually review the services they offer to 
      their full membership.  If we expect to attract two-year college faculty 
      to meetings, we must provide programs that are of interest to them.  
      Conferences and meetings must be held at a time when two-year faculty can 
      attend.  Journals and newsletters published by the societies must contain 
      articles that explore the full range of subjects about which the two-year 
      college faculty should be informed.  Editors of society journals must  be 
      more active in seeking articles and guest editorials written by members 
      of the two-year community.

     We have heard the figures which state that 22% of all matriculated 
students at the two-year college are minority.  As professional societies 
develop gender and culturally sensitive materials that recognize the 
significant roles played by minorities in science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics education, the two-year community must be consulted.  Materials 
which are tested and evaluated must be evaluated at two-year colleges as well 
as four-year colleges and universities. The two-year community provides us a 
rich resource.  We cannot and must not squander it!!

     If we expect this nation to continue to progress, if we expect to use all 
our resources efficiently (and that list of resources includes our students and 
faculty), then we must seek greater participation by all segments of society.  
I would, in my lifetime, like to go to a professional meeting and find more 
minorities than I have fingers.  The students and faculty are out there.  Let 
us invite them into the fold, not because of equity issues,  economic reasons, 
or the national interest, but because it is simply is the right thing to do.

     Finally, there is funding.  As professionals, we are dedicated to the 
premise that the best projects should receive the available dollars.  
Professional societies should be dedicated to increasing and improving the 
quality of proposals submitted by its members.  We remind societies that their 
membership includes two-year college faculty. Professional societies must 
encourage networking and collaborative efforts between two-year and four-year 
institutions.  Most two-year colleges do not have grant/development offices to 
assist in proposal writing.  Professional societies can and must help fill that 
void.

     This workshop has been but a beginning.  We have spent one and a half day 
in intense, focused discussions.  We have had some wonderful ideas presented.  
We must now put those ideas into action.  Each of us must depart as an advocate 
for the process. Each of us has increased our circle of friends and colleagues. 
 Let us use wisely what we have learned here.

Ellis, S.D. and Mulvey, P. J. , 1988-89 Survey of Physics and Astronomy 
Bachelor's Degree Recipients, AIP Pub. No. R-211.21,  April 1990

Ewen, D, Mertes, D, Matching Actions and Challenges, Report of a National 
Science Workshop on Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Education in Two-Year 
College,
NSF 91-111, May 1991

Informal Conversation, J Tavers

Recommendations from the Disciplines

After meeting in interdisciplinary working groups for a day and a half, 
participants in the workshop separated into groups representing eight 
scientific disciplines:  astronomy, chemistry, computer science, earth 
sciences, engineering and engineering technology, life sciences biological, 
mathematics, and physics.  The following are the recommendations that 
participants made to their respective disciplines.  The opinions and 
recommendations are those of the workshop participants collectively and do not 
reflect policy or opinions of the societies or the National Science Foundation. 
 Participants did however together make preliminary plans for presentation to 
their respective professional societies for implementation of the 
recommendations in this report.  An epilogue is included indicating preliminary 
actions that participants and societies have taken on these recommendations.

ASTRONOMY

The American Astronomical Society (AAS) should:

       Make arrangements for the Working Group on Astronomy Education to 
       sponsor a session at a professional meeting on "Education Initiatives at 
       Two-Year Colleges."

       Identify astronomers who teach at two-year colleges.

       Continue to have a representative from a two-year college on the 
       Education Advisory Board.

       Include two-year colleges in a funding proposal for public outreach in 
       astronomy.

       Activate the two-year college committee of the Education Office.

CHEMISTRY

The American Chemical Society (ACS) should:

       Conduct baseline studies on science, technology, engineering, and 
       mathematics  issues at two-year colleges including curricula, faculty, 
       definition of scholarship, and facilities and resources.

       Identify and submit names of qualified two-year college faculty to NSF 
       and other funding agencies to be considered as proposal reviewers, 
       workshop leaders, and program directors.  These names should include 
       representatives of chemical technology.

       Be an advocate for two-year colleges to Congress and other government 
       agencies.

       Highlight to two-year college faculty the benefits of membership in 
       professional societies.

       Solicit increased participation by two-year college faculty in all 
       functions of the American Chemical Society including decision making.

       Establish a mentoring system for proposal writing.

       Enhance the profile of two-year colleges by including articles about 
       successful two-year college programs in ACS publications.

COMPUTER
SCIENCE

The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) should:

       Include a regular discussion of two-year college issues in the ACM 
       newsletter, Communication of the ACM.

       Include representatives from two-year colleges in the governance 
       structure and establish a committee on two-year colleges.

       Include two-year colleges in the academic directory of departments and 
       faculty in computer science.

       Explore ways to get access to electronic communication for faculty at 
       two-year colleges.

       Encourage more participation by two-year college computer science 
       faculty by holding meetings on campuses of two-year colleges, including 
       information about two-year colleges in journals, and extending the 
       programming contest to two-year colleges.

EARTH
SCIENCES

Professional societies in the Earth Sciences should:

       Raise the awareness of members of the critical role two-year colleges 
       play in higher education through editorials and articles in journals and 
       newsletters and sessions at national and regional meetings.

       Encourage greater participation of two-year college faculty in society 
       meetings by including them in the planning process for workshops, 
       sessions, and field trips.

       Develop and support cooperative partnership programs between two-year 
       colleges and  other academic and research institutions, government 
       agencies, and the private sector.

       Sponsor joint society conferences on the status of earth science 
       education through Penrose and Chapman conferences.

       Act as catalyst for the improvement of undergraduate earth science 
       education through joint two-year/four-year college activities such as 
       summer institutes, cooperative reviews of curricula, and preparation of 
       standards.

       Obtain baseline information on two-year college earth science education.

ENGINEERING/
ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

Professional engineering societies should:

       Encourage institutions involved in NSF Engineering Education Coalitions 
       to include two-year colleges as formal, integral partners.

       Encourage the Community College Network within the ASEE to form a 
       coalition of regional and state articulation councils in order to 
       address urgent issues of lower division curriculum reform in 
       engineering.

       Explore ways for faculty at two-year colleges to get access to 
       electronic communication and advocate both the need and solutions to 
       administrators and funding agencies.

       Work with two-year colleges to develop interest in engineering and 
       engineering technology careers among students at the K-12 level.

       Develop programs with two-year colleges to significantly increase the 
       number of people from currently underrepresented groups in engineering 
       and engineering technology.

       Gather and disseminate information on engineering and engineering 
       technology education in two-year colleges.

INTER-DISCIPLINARY

       The Society for College Science Teachers should:

       Formalize the practice of having at least one representative of two-year 
       college faculty on its Executive Committee.

       Continue to have strong representation from two-year colleges on its 
       committees, especially the introductory course committee.

       Explore the feasibility of preparing a publication which highlights 
       exemplary science programs at two-year colleges as part of its ongoing 
       monograph series.

       Actively seek participation of two-year college faculty for it awards 
       and mini-grant programs.

       Strengthen its network in two-year colleges in cooperation with the 
       National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) by sending two-year college 
       faculty a copy of the Journal of College Science Teaching which 
       highlights professional involvement of two-year college faculty.

LIFE SCIENCES/
BIOLOGICAL

Professional life science societies should:

       Establish a  faculty database that will enhance opportunities for 
       faculty at two-year and four-year colleges and universities to network 
       across the life sciences.

       Commit resources to two-year college life science education.

       Set standards for lower division undergraduate life science education.

       Ensure two-year college representation on education policy and planning 
       committees.

       Raise the awareness of members about the contributions and critical 
       roles that of two-year colleges play in undergraduate life science 
       education.

       Provide opportunities and incentives for scientists in industry and 
       government  to network with two-year college faculty.

MATHEMATICS

Mathematics societies should:

       Through the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences (CBMS), 
       endorse the broad definition of scholarship recommended in the report of 
       Working Group A.  The CBMS should send a letter stating that endorsement 
       to the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) and ask that 
       they communicate to two-year college administrators the importance of 
       recognizing, rewarding, and supporting faculty involvement in scholarly 
       activities and providing release time and other resources for such 
       activities.

       Take the lead in promoting to two-year college mathematics faculty and 
       administrators the importance of electronic communication and other 
       electronic services.   Where necessary, the associations should 
       facilitate networking between two-year colleges and other institutions 
       of higher education to provide interim solutions to connectivity 
       problems.

       Seek input from two-year college faculty about services that could be 
       provided electronically to support improvement of teaching, learning, 
       and scholarship at two-year colleges.  In particular, the MAA Committee 
       on Electronic Services should seek such input.

       Include in the AMS/MAA/SIAM Combined Membership List (CML) members of  
       the American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges (AMATYC).  
       AMATYC should provide electronic files, including e-mail addresses, and 
       help contribute to funding the production and mailing of the CML.

       Periodically arrange joint meetings that provide K-12, two-year, 
       four-year and university faculty opportunities to exchange ideas and 
       develop mechanisms to work on projects of common interest.

       Recommend for assignment to national committees two-year college 
       mathematics faculty identified at regional and sectional levels.

PHYSICS

The American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) should:

       Establish a Center for Teaching/Learning to serve as a resource for 
       individuals who teach physics at all levels.   Two-year college faculty 
       should play a leading role in the establishment of this center.

       Solicit input from two-year college faculty regarding the development, 
       evaluation, and dissemination of lower division undergraduate physics 
       education programs and courses.

       Hold local, state, regional, and national meetings on two-year college 
       campuses.

       Include two-year colleges and their faculty in a professional directory.

       Conduct a survey to assess the needs of two-year college faculty.

       Coordinate programs that provide opportunities for two-year college 
       students to participate in physics research projects.

Two-Year College Mission and Students

Plenary Address
George R. Boggs

It is very gratifying to see the National Science Foundation and the 
professional societies recognizing the important role played by our community 
colleges in educating our future scientists, mathematicians, and engineers. It 
is a role we have been playing since before the turn of the century.

As early as 1936, Robert Hutchins spoke of the institution that we now call the 
community college as the "characteristic educational institution of the United 
States." Its egalitarian and open-access mission and its community-responsive 
curricula uniquely reflect our country's democratic ideals and values.

The founders of what was then called the junior college movement were 
influenced by German models of education. They argued that the first two years 
of collegiate education should be left to the secondary schools, freeing the 
universities from undergraduate education to concentrate on upper division and 
professional curricula. In 1892, William Rainey Harper at the University of 
Chicago separated the University into two divisions which came to be known as 
the "Junior College" and the "Senior College," and by 1900 the University was 
granting an associate's degree to those completing the first two years of 
college work.

In 1901 the first publicly-funded junior college, Joliet Junior College, was 
founded in Illinois. Throughout the early 1900s, education for transfer to 
four-year institutions was the focus of the colleges, and their curricula were 
similar to those of the first two years of undergraduate studies.

Although transfer education continued to be the goal of the majority of 
two-year college students, a parallel movement in the 1920s was toward the 
development of occupational and vocational programs. The addition of vocational 
courses and the responsiveness to local community needs engendered by these 
courses eventually led to the present-day comprehensive community college.

A significant boost to community colleges came in 1946, with President Truman's 
establishment of the Commission on Higher Education to look at ways to meet the 
needs of the streams of service men and women flowing into higher education as 
a result of the GI Bill. The Commission cited barriers including economics, 
restricted curriculum, and racial and religious prejudices or quotas, stating 
in its final report that "The Commission does not subscribe to the belief that 
higher education should be confined to an intellectual elite, much less a small 
elite drawn largely from families in the higher income brackets."  It concluded 
that education in the United States should be accessible and tuition free 
through grade 14.

The community college has played a significant role in what has been referred 
to as the "democratization" of higher education. Community colleges offer the 
ideal pathway for preparing first-in-the-family college students for college 
work in four-year institutions. These students find the affordability of a 
community college education very attractive. Without us, the doors of higher 
education would be closed to them.

Questions regarding the emphasis placed on one or the other of the two primary 
missions of transfer and vocational education continue to the present time.  
However, community colleges seem quite capable of providing both of these sets 
of curricula, and, indeed, the proximity of the two opens new options to 
students, who often shift from vocational to transfer courses of study and vice 
versa.

Today, there are more than 1400 public and private two-year colleges serving 
more than five million students. Most of our students are in public 
institutions, and nearly 25 percent are in California.

In 1991, 43 percent of all postsecondary students taking courses for college 
credit and 51 percent of all first-time college students were enrolled in 
community colleges. The average age of our students is 28. More than half are 
older than the traditional college-age cohort (18-24).

Only 40 percent receive financial support from their parents, compared to 70 
percent at four-year colleges, and only 29 percent receive some form of 
financial aid. Part-time students account for 67 percent of all enrollees. The 
overwhelming majority have full-time or part-time jobs.

Figures for 1986 showed that minorities comprised 22 percent of all credit 
students. In California, the figure is close to 40 percent. During the 1990s, 
more than four out of every five new California residents will be Asian or 
Hispanic. That trend will be reflected on our campuses.

Encouraging this emerging student body mature, employed, and independent to 
begin and persist in the study of science is a challenge that may require some 
new approaches on the part of a faculty that can engage their imagination, 
inspire them, and be responsive to their special needs. I have heard it 
suggested that we need to make special allowances for these students, with the 
implication that they are somehow less academically proficient than the 
"traditional" college student. This is not at all what I have in mind when I 
speak of special needs.

In fact, for a student body that is not necessarily proficient in English, 
mathematics, the universal language of science, can provide an immediate common 
ground enhancing mutual understanding. The community college faculty of the 
future will have to be flexible, not in teaching classes at a more elementary 
level, but in understanding the financial, job, and family constraints that 
affect many of our students. They will have to offer exciting learning 
opportunities that engage the enthusiasm of students who worked late the night 
before, or evening students who have worked all day at their regular jobs. They 
will have to communicate to their mature students, many of whom may be employed 
in the fields they are studying, not only the excitement of scholarship and 
research but also the potential applications of what they are learning. They 
will have to avoid letting students be imprisoned by stereotypes that the 
students themselves may believe.

To succeed at these tasks, we will need committed, scholarly faculty who have 
the time for professional development, who can take advantage of research 
opportunities in four-year and graduate institutions, who can interact with 
other scholars in their fields, and who have access to up-to-date equipment and 
time to develop course material that is stimulating and challenging.

We want our students to have the finest education we can offer in science, 
mathematics, and engineering.Our students must be prepared to live in a world 
where an understanding of science is essential, and they must also understand 
the limits of technology.

Our colleges must create an organizational climate for professional development 
based upon clear expectations, institutional recognition of achievement, 
opportunities for intellectual growth, enhancement of classroom teaching 
skills, and community-building in support of a shared vision of excellence.

In their monograph, Fostering a Climate for Faculty Scholarship at Community 
Colleges,  James C. Palmer and George B. Vaughan show that there is plenty of 
reason to be positive about the scholarship of our faculty. In studies where 
scholarship is defined solely in terms of research and publication, community 
college faculty involvement has often appeared low. However, when other 
scholarly activities are included, the level of participation has been found to 
be much greater.

In a national survey during 1989-90, Palmer (1992) broadened the definition of 
scholarship to include not only publications but also conference papers; 
instructional materials, including instructional software and unpublished text 
books or learning guides used by colleagues beyond the writer's own classroom; 
research or technical reports; community informational materials, exhibits or 
performances in the fine arts; technical innovations (patents, new 
technologies, noninstructional computer software); and other products.

He found that 86% of all full-time faculty had completed at least one such 
scholarly product in the two years preceding the survey. Fifty-five percent had 
presented papers at conferences, 36 percent had published, 34 percent had 
developed instructional materials for use by colleagues, 28 percent had 
produced research or technical reports, 23 percent had developed community 
informational materials, 16 percent reported exhibits or performances in the 
fine arts, and 12 percent reported technical innovations.

Significantly, this level of scholarship was achieved despite the fact that 27 
percent said they had received no help at all from their institutions: no 
encouragement from colleagues or administration, no computer time or equipment, 
no release time or sabbatical, no additional financial assistance.

Generally, when support was received, it was in the form of encouragement from 
administrators and colleagues rather than more tangible help such as f inancial 
assistance, computer time, or release time. Palmer saw these findings as 
encouraging, concluding that "collegial relationships have the potential to 
compensate--at least partially--for the lack of resources available to support 
faculty scholarship."

While the encouragement of peers and administration is clearly an important 
factor in community college faculty scholarship, full time faculty identified 
the time spent in teaching as the principal barrier to participation in 
scholarly activities.

Sixty-one percent of respondents felt that "teaching takes up too much time, " 
while lack of financial support was cited as a barrier by 45 percent. 
Thirty-two and 28 percent, respectively, cited advising/work with students 
outside of class, and administrative/committee work. Thirty-one percent were 
concerned about the lack of rewards for engaging in scholarship, indicating 
that it would not improve their rank or salary.

That time constraints can be an important barrier is shown by the typical 
teaching load at Palomar College.  Full-time faculty generally spend 15 lecture 
hours or a combination of 20 hours of lecture and laboratory in the classroom. 
They are expected to have a minimum of five office hours weekly. Three 
preparations are about average, but it would not be impossible for a faculty 
member to have f ive. In addition to these requirements, our faculty 
participate in college governance.

Interestingly, in their responses to Palmer's survey, many faculty did not want 
scholarly activities in their institutions to be made mandatory. They felt this 
would introduce the "publish or perish" mentality of the universities into an 
environment they had selected because of their love of teaching. Scholarship, 
they felt, should be encouraged for those who wish to be involved, but it 
should not be required.

In exploring ways to encourage community college scholarship, there is another 
facet of community college history that must be understood: a tendency to view 
teaching and scholarship as a dichotomy, with the implication that faculty who 
chose the former must reject the latter. As James Ratcliff (1992) has pointed 
out, "Community college educators take pride in their commitment to teaching. 
They view the ideal faculty member as a concerned, dedicated, and effective 
teacher." This emphasis has resulted in "a static vision of teaching . . . and 
a slighting of scholarship as a source of renewal and reinvigoration for 
community college faculty." Ratcliff refers to the origin of this feeling 
during "the second great growth period of community colleges (1955-1975), when 
many of today's community college faculty were hired. During this time, college 
leaders often expressed open hostility toward scholarship and the role of 
subject matter expertise in the preservice education of two-year college 
teachers."

In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis in community colleges on 
what Ernest Boyer (1987, 1990) has called "the scholarship of teaching."  
Duvall (1992) quotes Boyer as saying that "scholarship is at the heart of what 
the teaching profession is all about ... and to weaken faculty commitment for 
scholarship ... is to undermine the undergraduate experience, regardless of the 
academic setting."

A growing demand for accountability in education coincides with this emphasis 
on scholarship. Community college faculty are increasingly becoming involved in 
assessment of student outcomes, and "these efforts, rooted in the scholarship 
of discovery and application, should enable colleges to track the intellectual 
and personal growth of students over time, measure changes in student attitudes 
and values, and determine the knowledge and skills that students gain through 
the educational experience" (Duvall, op. cit.).

As all of our faculty become increasingly concerned with evaluating the 
effectiveness of their classroom presentations and teaching techniques, we can 
anticipate a concurrent willingness on the part of science and mathematics 
faculty to become involved in professional societies that offer the opportunity 
to share information and improve the ways in which their disciplines are 
taught. As the results of classroom research become available to faculty, 
scientists will be encouraged to remain current in their fields and to develop 
laboratory activities and classroom demonstrations that will expose students to 
the excitement of scientific research and discovery. In addition, sharing 
classroom research findings with other faculty in their field may draw into 
professional societies faculty who have not been involved in the past (Duvall, 
op. cit.).

As Vaughan (1992) says, "Once the link between scholarship and teaching is 
established, the definition of the community college culture will begin to 
change from the negative statement, "The community college is a teaching 
institution whose faculty do not do research," into the positive statement, 
"Community college faculty members are teachers and scholars."

Professional societies can help in this transformation by offering 
opportunities for professional contact, making a conscious effort to include 
community college faculty in their activities, and recommending standards for 
maintaining quality education within disciplines. The American Association of 
Physics Teachers, for example, held a conference on Critical Issues in 
Two-Year-College Physics and Astronomy. The group recommended that the workload 
of two-year-college physics and astronomy faculty should be limited to 15 
contact hours per week, 360 student contact hours per week, and three 
preparations.

Given the number of student contact hours now expected of the typical community 
college faculty member, and budgetary constraints that may make it difficult to 
implement these worthwhile recommendations for all our faculty, it is vitally 
important that we build into the academic year opportunities to develop their 
professional skills.

In California, the Education Code requires that faculty have a minimum of 175 
contractual days annually, only 160 of which are required to be instructional 
days. At Palomar College, our academic calendar provides for 165 days of 
classroom instruction. The remaining ten days are reserved for professional 
development activities arranged by each faculty member. The activities must be 
well-planned, professionally appropriate, and described in detail in a 
professional development contract.

Qualifying activities fall into three major areas: currency and growth in one's 
field, workplace effectiveness, and organizational dynamics.  Maintaining 
currency and growing in one's field can include activities such as preparing 
for conference and workshop presentations, attending professional conferences 
and workshops, writing for publication, engaging in original research, or 
taking advanced courses.

To give you an idea of what community college faculty can achieve if they are 
given time and encouragement, here are some recent professional development 
activities of our science faculty.

       Conducting visual perception research and writing a paper on visual 
       short-term memory.

       Field research and completion of a pictorial manuscript about lichens. 
       The article will focus on the "marriage" between algae and fungi to form 
       this successful symbiotic life form and will include photomicrographs of 
       a seldom-seen marine lichen growing on the calcareous shells of 
       barnacles, chitons, and limpets.

       Natural product research on chemical constituents of a plant with 
       malodorous leaf-components that might have antirodent activity due to 
       the possible fatty ketone content.

       Studying marine mammals and birds of the islands off Baja California.

       Studying penguin breeding behavior in Antarctica and avifauna and marine 
       mammals in Tierra del Fuego.

       Research and development involving reactions of Friedel-Crafts 
       alkylation on microscale.

       Research and Development of Diels-Alder "safe" insecticide analog.

       Research and Development involving N-Bromosuccinimide.

       Learning to use a new system for producing weather maps and satellite 
       images for use in the meteorology program.

In addition, we encourage our faculty to take sabbatical leave.

       A botanist on our faculty used his sabbatical to work with experts in 
       Berkeley, the Virgin Islands, and Zurich, and to study tropical botany.

       A mathematics professor completed a three-book series of mathematics 
       texts in college algebra and trigonometry.

       A life sciences faculty member produced microscopic videos of cell 
       organelles and protists. (Incidentally, this was only possible because 
       Palomar College has the necessary microscope and video camera 
       equipment.)

       A physicist used his sabbatical to study computer numerical methods and 
       programming techniques to be used for physics applications.

       One of our mathematics faculty wanted to work for short periods of time 
       at several high-tech firms to gain experience in mathematics 
       applications that she could share with her students, but she was unable 
       to find a firm that was willing to offer her a short-term project and 
       had to revise her plan. Here is a situation where association support 
       might have been helpful.

       A chemist used his sabbatical to develop new chemistry lab experiments.

When I look at scholarly achievements like these, on the part of faculty at 
colleges where so much time must be spent in the classroom and preparation, I 
can only feel optimism.

Again, I am heartened by the effort each of you is making to enhance the 
teaching of science in our community colleges, and I  applaud your concern for 
the future of science in our country.

References

Boyer, E. L. College: The Undergraduate Experience in America. New York: Harper 
and Row, 1987.

Boyer, E. L Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate 
Princeton, N. J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990.

Duvall, Betty. "Scholarship and the Academic Dean." In James C. Palmer and 
George B. Vaughan, Fostering a Climate for Faculty

Scholarship at Community Colleges. American Association for Community and 
Junior Colleges, 1992, pp. 17?-22.

Palmer, James C. "The Scholarly Activities of Community College Faculty: 
Findings of a National Survey." In James C. Palmer and George B. Vaughan, 
Fostering a Climate for Faculty Scholarship at Community Colleges. American 
Association for Community and Junior Colleges, 1992, pp. 49-65.

Ratcliff, James L. "Scholarship, the Transformation of Knowledge, and Community 
College Teaching." In James C. Palmer and George B. Vaughan, Fostering a 
Climate for Faculty Scholarship at Community  Colleges. American Association 
for Community and Junior Colleges, 1992, pp. 39-47.

Vaughan, George B. "Scholarship and the Culture of the Community College." In 
James C. Palmer and George B. Vaughan, Fostering a Climate for Faculty 
Scholarship at Community Colleges. American Association for Community and 
Junior Colleges, 1992, pp. 1-9.

Two-Year Colleges and the Scientific Literacy of the American People

Comments Submitted to the
National Science Foundation
by Benjamin S. Shen

Dr. Shen, a member of the National Science Board, is vice-chairman of its 
Committee on Education and Human Resources and chairman of its Task Force on 
Scientific Literacy. The following is based on remarks he made at the Workshop. 
He points out that the views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily 
reflect those of the NSB or NSF.

I would like to say a few words about scientific literacy and how it relates to 
two-year colleges. In this talk, I will use the word "science" or "scientific" 
in the broadest sense, to include mathematics, applied science, technology, 
even preventive medicine. Generally, instead of saying "health, mathematical, 
scientific, and technological literacy", I'll just say "scientific literacy" 
for short.

I feel particularly comfortable talking about scientific literacy with this 
audience, for in the proceedings of one of your earlier workshops [NSF 89-50, 
June 1989, page i] I find a statement to the effect that science education in 
two-year colleges has at least two aims: (1) to increase the supply of the 
nation's scientific and technical personnel, and (2) to improve significantly 
the "scientific literacy of the general public".

It was along similar lines that the National Science Board recently took steps 
to re-emphasize its interest not only in the education of present and future 
scientists and engineers -- a vital task in itself -- but also in the 
scientific education of the 90% of Americans who are not or do not intend to be 
scientists or engineers. The Board did so by establishing an ad hoc Task Force 
on Scientific Literacy, which has been asked to develop concrete 
recommendations for improving the scientific literacy of the American people.

I do not need to dwell, especially with this audience, on why it would be 
highly desirable, even necessary, for Americans of today and tomorrow to be 
scientifically literate, that is, to possess a lifelong acquaintance with some 
of the basics of mathematics, science, technology, and health to a degree 
appropriate to their needs, just as it has long been necessary for everyone to 
acquire varying degrees of acquaintance with the three R's. At a practical 
level, Americans will increasingly find that just to qualify for entry-level 
jobs in the future workplace or even to function efficiently in everyday life 
will call for a moderate level of quantitative reasoning and problem-solving 
skills that their parents or grandparents have not found necessary.

Simultaneously, there is an increasing need for the citizenry to possess what 
is sometimes called "civic scientific literacy", that is, the ability to form 
judicious opinions about the growing number of public issues that have a 
scientific and technological content, whether in the area of environment, 
energy, space, health, safety, research, industry, commerce, or general 
national prosperity. Finally, at a cultural level, there are also sound reasons 
to believe that some aspects of science and technology ought to be an integral 
part of the knowledge base of an educated person, of the liberal arts 
curriculum, and of the general culture of a nation otherwise so steeped in 
those fields of endeavor. To be sure, these major objectives of scientific 
literacy -- the practical, the civic, and the cultural -- overlap a great deal 
in terms of target audiences, standards, and means of delivery.

In doing its work, the Task Force on Scientific Literacy has decided to focus 
its deliberations on three specific areas:

First, we would like to see what specific actions may be taken, both within and 
outside the nation's education system, that would ensure that young people 
entering the industrial workforce will possess enough basic mathematical and 
technical knowledge and skills to allow them to take advantage of more 
specialized on-the-job training.

Second, we would like to help enhance the role played by the communications 
media and by other institutions of public access in imparting and maintaining 
lifelong scientific literacy; these would include radio, broadcast and cable 
television, newspapers, magazines, and computer networks, as well as libraries, 
museums, science centers, planetariums, parks, botanical gardens, zoos, etc.

Third, we are concerned about the scientific literacy of college graduates, and 
the nature of the introductory science courses for non-science majors that 
often constitute the only exposure to science of future leaders of education, 
government, business, and industry.

Let me say a word about a couple of pitfalls that could discredit efforts to 
improve scientific literacy. First, there is occasionally a tendency for those 
promoting scientific literacy to want the general public to know much more 
about science than necessary or even to want to make scientists out of 
everybody. The general public have other important things to do, and science 
should have no greater claim on their attentiveness than art or tax rules or 
world affairs. Producing more scientists and engineers may indeed be a welcome 
by-product of scientific literacy, but not its primary objective. Second, 
scientific literacy should not be aimed at shoring up the reputation of science 
in the public eye, or at cultivating constituents in favor of public funding 
for scientific projects. Scientific literacy is not a public-relations 
opportunity for science or scientists. A person who is scientifically literate 
may or may not favor science, and that's the way it should be.

Can two-year colleges help improve scientific literacy? Most emphatically yes. 
There are several reasons why I think two-year colleges can play a very useful 
role.

First, since two-year colleges have closer ties with the local high schools 
from which they get their students than does the typical four-year institution, 
they should be better able to influence the teaching and learning there.

Second, since two-year colleges have close connections with industrial 
employers to whom they send graduates from their associate and training 
programs, they have a realistic appreciation of what basic skills and knowledge 
are needed.

Lastly, since two-year colleges enroll at least half of the young people who 
enter college in this country, many of whom later move on to four-year 
institutions, they play a major role in teaching introductory mathematics, 
science, and technology to nonmajors in those fields. More important, since a 
large fraction of students in two-year colleges are from minority or 
economically-disadvantaged backgrounds, two-year colleges are in a unique 
position to help with the scientific literacy of these students.

I would like to encourage all of you to think about how you, at your 
institution and locality, could go about trying to improve the scientific 
literacy of your graduates, of the students you take in, and of the people in 
your community. Some of you may have ideas about major projects that would lead 
to substantial advances in scientific literacy. Having heard the discussions at 
this workshop, I realize the severe time constraints you may face when you try 
to divert your interest to worthy educational endeavors beyond classroom 
teaching. In the long run, it may be that a method of  releasing time from 
teaching to engage in important non-teaching educational activities needs to be 
worked out at two-year colleges, as it has at many four-year institutions, so 
that those with external grants from recognized private or public sources can 
devote concentrated effort to a project.

The Task Force would very much like to hear any comments and advice you or your 
colleagues may have for us on any or all of the issues I raised here. Please 
send your comments to the Executive Secretary of Task Force: Myles Boylan, 
National Science Foundation, Washington, DC 20550 (Tel. 202-357-7826; Fax 
202-357-1114; e-mail mboylan@nsf.gov). Liaison officers with NSF are Luther 
Williams and Cora Marrett, both Assistant Directors of NSF. Task Force members 
are, besides myself, Jaime Oaxaca, James Powell, Ian Ross, and Richard Zare; 
all are members of the National Science Board, and the NSB switchboard 
(202-357-9582) can tell you how to reach us individually.

     Two-Year College Workshop
Participants

         KEY

*  - Working Group Chair

** - Working Group Recorder

+  - Discipline Leader

++ - Workshop Co-Chair

James M. Adams      Computer Science/A
ACM
1515 Broadway
New York, NY  10036

Don Albers          Mathematics/E
Associate Director/ Publications and Programs
MAA Headquarters
1529  18th Street, NW
Washington, DC  20036

Robert Anthony      Biology/E
Science Department
2000 5th Avenue
Triton College
River Grove, IL  60171

+Charlotte Behm          Engineering/B
Chair, Engineering
Mission College
Santa Clara, CA 95054

Tanja Beliz         Biology/A
Department of Biology
College of San Mateo
San Mateo, CA 94704

George Boggs        Interdisciplinary
President - Elect
American Association of Community Colleges
Superintendent/President Palomar College
San Marcos, CA  92069

Peter Boyce         Astronomy/D
Executive Officer
American Astronomical Society
1630 Connecticut Ave., NW
Suite 200
Washington, DC  20009

+Linda Boyd         Mathematics/A
Department of Mathematics
DeKalb College
555 North Indian Creek Drive
Clarkston, GA  30021

John S. Bradley          Mathematics/E
American Mathematics Society
Washington Office
1529 Eighteenth Street NW
Washington, DC  20036

Sadie Bragg         Mathematics
Dean of Academic Affairs
City University of New York
Borough of Manhattan Community College
199 Chambers Street
New York, NY  10007

Lia Brillhart       Engineering/E
Engineering Department
Triton Community College
River Grove, IL 60171

Charles M. Chambers Biology/D
Executive Director
American Instit. of Biological Sciences
730 11th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001-4521

+Amy L. Chang       Biology/A
Assistant Director
American Society For Microbiology
Office of Education and Training
1325 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20005

Max Cisneros        Mathematics/B
Department of Developmental Studies
Albuquerque Technical-Vocational Institute
525 Buena Vista SE
Albuquerque, NM  87106

William S. Cohen    Biology/B
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Kentucky
101 Morgan Building
Lexington, KT  40506-0225

Nell Dale      Computer Science/A
Computer Science Department
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX  78712

Carol Edwards       Mathematics/C
Department of Mathematics
St. Louis Community College - Florissant Valley
3400 Pershall Road
St. Louis, MO  63135

*Donald Emmeluth    Biology/D
Department of Biology
Fulton-Montgomery Community College
Johnstown, NY  12095

I. Dwaine Eubanks   Chemistry/A
ACS Exams Institute
Clemson University
223 Brackett Hall
Box 341913
Clemson, SC  29634-1913

*Dale Ewen          Mathematics/E
 Vice-President for Academic Services
Parkland College
2400 West Bradley Avenue
Champaign, IL  61821

++Susan Forman      Mathematics
3701 Connecticut Avenue NW
Apartment 439
Washington, DC  20008

Jim Gates      Mathematics/D
Executive Director
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
1906 Association Drive
Reston, VA  22091

Edward Geary        Geology/D
Educational Programs Coordinator
Geological Society of America
P.O. Box 9140
Boulder, CO  80301-9140

Ira Geer            Meterology
Director, Meteorological Society
1701 K Street NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC  20006

Deborah Haimo       Mathematics/D
Department of Mathematics
University of Missouri
St. Louis, MO  63121-4499

James G. Harris          Engineering/E
EL/EE Department
Cal Poly
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407

Richard Hart        Engineering/C
Engineering Department
Cabrillo College
Aptos, CA  95003

David Hata          Engineering/D
Chair
Electronics Engineering Technology
Portland Community College
P.O. Box 19000
Portland, OR  97280-0990

William Hawkins          Mathematics
Director SUMMA Project
MAA Headquarters
1529  18th Street, NW
Washington, DC  20036

Ed Heath       Chemistry/C
Committee on Chemistry in the Two-Year College
ACS Division of Chemical Education
Southwest Texas Junior College
Uvalde, TX  78801-6297

*Jack Hehn          Physics/C
Associate Executive Officer
American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT)
5112 Berwyn Rd.
College Park, MD  20742

**Curtis Hieggelke  Physics/E
Department of Physics
Joliet Junior College
1216 Houbolt Avenue
Joliet, IL  60436

+Mary Kay Hemenway  Astronomy/A
Education Officer AAS
Astronomy Department
University of Texas
Austin, TX  78712-1083

Frank Huband                        Engineering
Executive Director
American Society for Engin. Education
11 DuPont Circle  Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036

John Impagliazzo    Computer Science/C
Hofstra University
Chair, Computer Science
1000 Hempstead Turnpike
Hempstead, NY  11550

Frank Ireton        Geology/B
Executive Advisor for the National
Earth Science Teachers Association
American Geophysical Union
2000 Florida Ave, NW
Washington, DC  20009

**Karl Klee         Computer Science/D
Department of Computer Science
Jamestown Community College
Jamestown, NY  14702

Donald Kreider      Mathematics/A
Department of Mathematics
Dartmouth College
Box 2066
New London, NH  03257

Woodrow Leake       Engineering/C
Deputy Executive Director
American Society for Engin. Education
11 DuPont Circle  Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036

*J. Ivan Legg       Chemistry/A
Provost
Memphis State University
Memphis, TN  38152

John Lennox         Biology/C
Department of Biology
Penn State University
Altoona Campus
Altoona, PA 16603

Joyce Little        Computer Science/E
Department of Computer Science
Towson State University
Towson, MD  21204

**Beverly T. Lynds  Astronomy/C
Chair Two-year College Commmittee AAS
3244 6th Street
Boulder, CO  80304

Marilyn Mays        Mathematics/C
Department of Mathematics
North Lake College
5001 MacArthur Boulevard
Irving, TX  75038-3899

James McKenney                Interdisciplinary/E
American Association of Community Colleges
1 Dupont Circle NW
Washington, DC 20036

Marcus Milling      Geology/C
Executive Director
American Geological Institute
4220 King Street
Alexandria, VA  22302

Shelba Morman       Mathematics/E
Department of Mathematics
North Lake College
5001 MacArthur Boulevard
Irving, TX  75038-3899

Sandra Murrell      Mathematics/B
Shelby State Community College
Department of Mathematics
Memphis, TN  38174-0568

**Terri Nally       Chemistry/B
Manager, Office of College Chemistry
American Chemical Society
Education Division
1155 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Nataraj S. Nataraj  Engineering/D
Department of Engineering
Sinclair Community College
Dayton, OH  45402

+ Tom O'Kuma        Physics/A
Department of Physics
Lee College
511 South Whiting Road
Baytown, TX  77530

Patricia Perez      Chemistry/E
Chair, Chemistry Department
Mt. San Antonio College
1100 N. Grand Ave.
Walnut, CA  21789

David Pierce        Interdisciplinary
 President
American Association of Community Colleges
1 Dupont Circle NW
Washington, DC 20036

+Lucy T. Pryde      Chemistry/B
Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Clemson University
223 Brackett Hall
Box 341913
Clemson, SC  29634-1913

Ernesto Ramirez, Jr.     Interdisciplinary/D
Maricopa Community Colleges
Director, Comprehensive Regional
Center for Minorities
2411 West 14th Street
Tempe, AR  85281-6941

Jack Rhoton         Interdisciplinary/B
College Director
National Science Teachers Association
East Tennessee University
Box 70684
Johnson City, TN  37614

Virginia Rivers          Biology/C
Department of Biology
Truckee Meadows Community College
7000 Dandini Blvd.
Reno, NV  89512

Ron Rosier          Interdisciplinary/E
Conference Board on the Mathematical              Sciences
1529 Eighteenth Street NW
Washington, DC  20036

Brian Schwartz      Physics/B
Associate Secretary and Education Officer
American Physical Society
335 East 45th Street
New York, NY  10017-3484

Karen Sharp         Mathematics/D
Department of Mathematics
Mott Community College
1401  E. Court St.
Flint, MI  48503

Benjaming S. Shen   Astronomy/Physics
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA  19104

Eleanor D. Siebert  Interdisciplinary/D
President, Society for College Science Teachers
Dept of Physical Sciences and Mathematics
Mount St. Mary's College
12001 Chalon Road
Los Angeles, CA  90049

Lynn A. Steen       Mathematics
Executive Director
Mathematical Sciences Education Board
2101 Constitution Avenue NW  HA 476
Washington, DC  20418

++ James H. Stith   Physics
Department of Physics
United States Military Academy
West Point, NY  10996

*Dorothy Stout      Geology/B
Department of Geology
Cypress College
Cypress, CA  90630

Marilyn Suitor      Geology/E
Director for Education
American Geological Institute
4220 King Street
Alexandria, VA  22302

+Keith Sverdrup          Geology/A
Chair of Education Committee
American Geophysical Union
Department Geosciences
University of Wisconsin
Milwaukee, WI  53201

Pamela Tabery       Biology/E
Department of Biology
Northhampton Community College
Bethlehem, PA  18017

Judith Tavel        Physics/B
Department Chair
Mathematics, Physics, and Computer Science
Dutchess County Community College
53 Pendell Road
Poughkeepsie, NY  12601

Brian Tormey        Geology/C
First Vice-President of NAGT
Penn State
University Drive
Altoona Campus
Altoona, PA  16601

Alan C. Tucker      Mathematics/C
Applied Mathematics Department
SUNY at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, NY  11794-3600

**Peggie Weeks      Engineering/A
Department of Engineering and Technology
Corning Community College
1 Academic Drive
Corning,  NY  14830-3297

+John Werth         Computer Science/B
Chair, Education Board
Department of Computer Science
Taylor Hall
University of Texas
Austin, TX  78712

Carol L. White      Chemistry/D
Assistant Industrial Sponsors Chair
Committee on Chemistry in the Two-Year College
Athens Area Technical Institute
U.S. Highway 29 North
Athens, GA  30610-0399

NSF Presenters

Lida Barrett
Senior Advisor
Office of the Assistant Director/
Education and Human Resources

John Clevenger
NSF/AACJC Fellow
Division of Undergraduate Education

Elizabeth Teles
Program Officer
Division of Undergraduate Education

Robert Watson
Director
Division of Undergraduate Education

Peter Yankwich
Senior Staff
Office of the Assistant Director/
Education and Human Resources

Planning Committee

NSF/AACC Fellows

Jody Chase
Divison of Human Resource Development

John Clevenger
Division of Undergraduate Education

Carolyn Girardeau
Division of Research, Evaluation,
and Dissemination

Harry Hajian
Division of Elementary, Secondary, and
Informal Science

Lourdes Tinajero
Divison of Human Resource Development

NSF Program Directors

Ray Collings
Division of Elementary, Secondary, and
Informal Science

Patricia Daniels
Division of Undergraduate Education

Gerhard Salinger
Division of Elementary, Secondary, and
Informal Science

Elizabeth Teles
Division of Undergraduate Education

Participating Societies in the NSF Workshop on the Role of Professional 
Societies in Two-Year College Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education

American Association of Community Colleges  (AACC)
1 Dupont Circle NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 728-0200

American Association of Physics Teachers  (AAPT)
5112 Berwyn Road
College Park, Maryland  20742
(301) 345-4200

American Astronomical Society (AAS)
1630 Connecticut Avenue NW
Suite 200
Washington, D. C. 20009
(202) 328-2010

American Chemical Society (ACS)
1155 16th Street NW
Washington, D. C. 20036
(202) 872-4587

American Geological Institute  (AGI)
4220 King Street
Alexandria, Virginia  22302
(703) 379-2480

American Geophysical Union  (AGU)
2000 Florida Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 462-6903

American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS)
730 11th Street NW
Washington, D. C. 20001-4521
(202) 628-1500

American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges (AMATYC)
c/o Karen Sharp
Mott Community College
1401 East Court Street
Flint, Michigan 48503
(313) 232-3980

American Mathematical Society  (AMS)
Box 6248
201 Charles Street
Providence, Rhode Island 02940-6248
(401) 455-4000

Washington Office
1529 Eighteenth Street NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 588-1100

American Meteorological Society
1701 K Street NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 466-6070

American Physical Society (APS)
335 East 45th Street
New York, New York 10017-3484
(212) 682-7341

American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE)
11 Dupont Circle  Suite 200
Washington, D. C. 20036
(202) 986-8500

American Society for Microbiology (ASM)
1325 Massachusetts NW
Washington, D. C. 20005
(202) 737-3600

Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
1515 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
(212) 869-7440

Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences  (CBMS)
1529 Eighteenth Street NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 293-1170

Geological Society of America  (GSA)
Box 9140
Boulder, Colorado 80301-9140
(303) 447-2020

Human Anatomy and Physiology (HAPS)
c/o Virginia Rivers
Truckee Meadows Community College
7000 Dandini Boulevard
Reno, Nevada  89512

Mathematical Association of America  (MAA)
1529 Eighteenth Street NW
Washington, D. C. 20036
(202) 387-5200

Mathematical Sciences Education Board  (MSEB)
2101 Constitution Avenue NW  HA476
Washington, DC 20418
(202) 334-3294

National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT)
11250 Roger Bacon Drive  #19
Reston, Virginia 22090
(703) 471-1134

National Association for Geology Teachers (NAGT)
c/o Robert Christman
Western Washington University
Bellingham, Washington 98225-9080
(206) 676-3587

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics  (NCTM)
1906 Association Drive
Reston, Virginia 22091
(703) 620-9840

National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
c/o Jack Rhoton
East Tennessee University
Johnson City, Tennessee  37614
(615) 929-4288

1742 Connecticut Avenue NW
 Washington, DC 20036
 (202) 328-5800

Society of College Science Teachers (SCST)
c/o Eleanor Siebert
Mount St. Mary's Road
12001 Chalon Road
Los Angeles, California 90049
(310) 476-2237

EPILOGUE

Participants left the workshop with preliminary plans for implementing 
recommendations of the workshops in their respective professional societies.  
In the four months since the workshop, NSF has received numerous reports of 
what has already happened.  Below are a sample of these activities.

Astronomy:     Reported on workshop to the Council of the American Astronomical 
Society; asked                members if they teach at two-year colleges; and 
made plans to activate two-year                committee.

Chemistry:     Presented chemistry action items to Governance Board at National 
ACS Convention;
          included two-year college faculty names in list of nominees for 
          panels and other
          lists to funding agencies; had the Membership Division sponsor a 
          membership
          booth at Two-Year College Chemistry  Convention (2YC3); published 
          additional
          articles by two-year college faculty in newsletter of the Education 
          Division of ACS

Computer
Science:       Curriculum Development Guidelines for Computing in Two-Year 
Colleges was
          unanimously approved by ACM Education Board; ACM rules have been
          modified to make it easier to institute a new Special Interest Group 
          and two-year
          group has been encouraged to submit a proposal; Placed a two-year 
          college
          faculty member on ballot for a position on the Board of Directors of 
          ACM

Earth Sciences:     Published an article summarizing the conference and 
proceedings in the
          American Geophysical Union's (AGU) weekly magazine EOS called "Does 
          AGE Need              Two-Year Institutions?  Do Two-Year 
          Institutions Need AGU?"; AGU's Committee on
          Education and Human Resources has given preliminary approval to 
          having a joint
          conference with other Earth Science professional and scientific 
          societies that will
          focus on the role two-year institutions play in the training of 
          scientists; made plans to
          convene a combined Chapman-Penrose Conference on undergraduate 
          education in
          the earth sciences.

Engineering:   Surveyed states concerning establishment of a national two-year 
college engineering
          network to deal with issues concerning lower division engineering 
          courses, articulation,
          and networking with existing and future engineering organizations; 
          placed the issue
          of establishment of such a network on the agenda of the Community 
          College Section
          of ASEE; encouraged two-year engineering faculty in California to 
          apply for grants and
          volunteer to serve as reviewers

Interdisciplinary:  In cooperation with the National Science Teachers 
Association (NSTA) sent two-year
          college faculty a copy of Journal of College Science Teaching which 
          highlights
          professional involvement of two-year college faculty.

Life Sciences: Published an article in the ASM News about the workshop;  
planned a survey on
          technical education in New Hampshire.

Mathematics:   Made a presentation to the Conference Board of the Mathematical 
Sciences on
          workshop;  article on workshop and another on electronic networking 
          appeared in                AMATYC News; made action plans at meeting 
          of the MAA Committee on Two-Year                Colleges to implement 
          the     recommendations, article in UME Trends on workshop;
          received endorsement of the MAA Committee on Computers in Mathematics
          Education on two recommendations concerning electronic services, made 
          a
          presentation to MAA Reward's Committee on Recommendations of Working
          Group A.

Physics:       Initiated plans to establish a Center for the Teaching of 
Physics, established an
          Advisory Committee for that Center that has a standing member from 
          the two-year
          community, in partnership with the American Institute of Physics is 
          investigating
          ways the introductory physics course can be improved and is including 
          two-
          year college faculty on the Steering Committee, devoted a major 
          portion of
          retiring President of AAPT to addressing the need to reach out to 
          two-year
          community (to be published in the Announcer).

Two-Year Colleges

To meet the economic and social needs of today's society, America's colleges 
and universities are being called upon to produce mathematically and 
scientifically literate workers and citizens.  The nation's two-year colleges 
are ideally positioned to serve as catalysts in this effort because while they 
serve a variety of purposes, they all have a single dominant mission -- 
effective education for all students.

Two-year colleges bring three important strengths to the development of the 
nation's human resources in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.  
First, they support a great diversity of learning objectives ranging from  
technical education and career-oriented courses to remediation and transfer to 
four-year colleges and universities.  Second, they provide access to higher 
education for many who might not otherwise have the opportunity and enroll 
large numbers of minority and female students.  Third, they take their service 
to the community seriously by offering courses designed to help the work force 
upgrade and renew job skills as well as activities and courses for life-long 
learning.

The National Science Foundation intends to work with two-year colleges on their 
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs.  Such programs can 
yield triple dividends:  some graduates of such programs will be ready to 
embark immediately on careers in the industrial work force; others will 
continue their education in pursuit of baccalaureate degrees in science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics; and still others will have acquired 
useful skills and familiarity with mathematics and science.

The National Science Foundation provides educational support to  two-year 
colleges as well as other institutions of education through leadership 
activities and leveraged program support.  This workshop, designed to help 
determine the role of professional societies in science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics education,  is an example of a leadership 
activity.  Leveraged program support of projects in two-year colleges has 
primarily been through the Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) which is 
in the Directorate of Education and Human Resources (EHR).   DUE supports 
projects for the development of laboratory components of science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics courses, faculty enhancement, and curricular and 
instructional improvement.  The National Science Foundation also supports 
two-year college projects in teacher enhancement (K-12) programs, young 
scholars, career access, materials development, and alliances for minority 
participation.