Title  : NSF 95-3 - Third National Conference on Diversity in the Scientific &
         Technological Workforce
Type   : Report
NSF Org: EHR
Date   : March 27, 1995
File   : nsf953a




THIRD NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
DIVERSITY IN THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL WORKFORCE

September 29-October 1, 1994
Omni Shoreham Hotel
Washington, D.C.

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

National Science Foundation
Directorate for Education and Human Resources



National Conference on Diversity
  in the Scientific and Technological Workforce
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Neal Lane
Director
National Science Foundation

Luther S. Williams
Assistant Director
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
National Science Foundation

Bruce M. Alberts
President
National Academy of Sciences

Eugene H. Cota-Robles
Consultant to the Director
National Science Foundation

Marvin Druger
President
National Science Teachers Association

Virginia R. Ferris
Executive Committee
Phi Beta Kappa and
Professor of Entomology
Purdue University

Diana Garcia Prichard
Research Scientist
Eastman Kodak Company

Peter H. Gerber
Director, Education Programs
MacArthur Foundation

John H. Gibbons
Assistant to the President
  for Science and Technology
and Director, Office of
  Science and Technology Policy

Fredrick A. Humphries
President
Florida A&M University

J. Robert Kerrey
United States Senator

Shirley M. Malcom
National Science Board Member and
Head, Directorate for Education
  and Human Resources Programs
American Association for the
  Advancement of Science

Barbara A. Mikulski
United States Senator

Jaime Oaxaca
National Science Board Member and
Vice Chairman
Coronado Communications Corporation

Clifton A. Poodry
Director
MORE Programs Branch
National Institute of General Medical Sciences
National Institutes of Health

James L. Powell
National Science Board Member and
President and CEO
Los Angeles County Natural
  History Museum

Anne S. Pruitt
National Science Foundation
Committee on Equal Opportunities
  in Science and Engineering and
Dean In Residence
Council of Graduate Schools

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

John Ruffin
Associate Director for Research on Minority Health
National Institutes of Health

Terry Cornwell Rumsey
Director
Office of Science Education & Technical Information
Department of Energy

Calvin H. Smith
Deputy Superintendent
Cincinnati Public Schools

Louis Stokes
United States Congressman

Esteban E. Torres
United States Congressman



TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

OPENING SESSION

NATIONAL VIDEOCONFERENCE

LUNCHEON SESSIONS
Luncheon Forum
Awards Luncheon

AWARD PRESENTATIONS

FORUMS & WORKSHOPS
Forum on Undergraduate Education
Student Forum
Directorate Workshops on Education Activities

CLOSING SESSION

STUDENT RESEARCH COMPETITION: AWARD-WINNING PAPERS
Precollege
Undergraduate
Graduate

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Conference Program
Appendix B: List of Conference Participants
Appendix C: List of Conference Exhibitors

NOTE: All presentations have been edited.

The views expressed by conference participants do not necessarily
represent NSF policy.



INQUIRIES

Questions not addressed in this publication may be directed to the
     Directorate for Education & Human Resources by writing to:
     Diversity Conference Coordinator
     Office of the Assistant Director
     Directorate for Education and Human Resources
     National Science Foundation
     Room 805
     4201 Wilson Boulevard
     Arlington, VA 22230

The National Science Foundation (NSF) provides awards for research
and education in the sciences and engineering. The awardee is
wholly responsible for the conduct of such research and projects
and preparation of the results for publication. The Foundation,
therefore, does not assume responsibility for such findings or
their interpretation.

The Foundation welcomes proposals on behalf of all qualified
scientists and engineers, and strongly encourages women,
minorities, and persons with disabilities to compete fully in any
of the research and research-related programs described in this
document.

In accordance with Federal statutes and regulations and NSF
policies, no person on the grounds of race, color, age, sex,
national origin, or disability shall be excluded from participation
in, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under
any program or activity receiving financial assistance from the
National Science Foundation.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities
provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable
persons with disabilities (investigators and other staff, including
student research assistants) to work on an NSF project. See the
program announcement (NSF Publication 91-54), or contact the
program coordinator in the Directorate for Education and Human
Resources. The telephone number is (703) 306-1636.

The Foundation has TDD (Telephonic Device for the Deaf) capability,
which enables individuals with hearing impairment to communicate
with the Division of Human Resource Management about NSF programs,
employment, or general information. The telephone number is (703)
306-0090.

This document is a summary of a conference supported by the
National Science Foundation. It contains remarks by guest speakers
and conference participants, some of whom are not members of the
NSF staff. Any opinions, conclusions or recommendations expressed
by such persons are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.



INTRODUCTION

The National Science Foundation (NSF) Directorate for Education and
Human Resources (EHR) sponsored the Third National Conference on
Diversity in the Scientific and Technological Workforce from
September 29 through October 1, 1994, at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in
Washington, D.C. The conference--attended by more than 1,900
persons from the academic, corporate, and government
sectors--served as a platform for presenting and discussing the NSF
action plan to increase the participation of minorities in the
scientific and technological workforce. The action plan was
initially formulated at the 1992 diversity conference, and reviewed
at the 1993 conference. Presentation of the plan, at this
conference, was followed by sessions to gather feedback from
participants on implementation strategies. The resulting plan will
be published as a separate document after participant comments are
incorporated and critiqued by NSF senior policy officials.

A broad group of issues related to conference objectives was
discussed in a national videoconference, which expanded the
conference audience to include thousands of college students and
faculty nationwide. The conference agenda also included a forum on
undergraduate education to solicit input regarding the future
direction of NSF's efforts in this area.

As in previous conferences, more than 300 students from elementary
to graduate school who participated in NSF-sponsored research
activities presented their research in panel and poster sessions.
(Abstracts of all student presentations are available in a separate
document.) For the first time, students in grades 7-9, representing
the Summer Science Camps Program of the EHR directorate, presented
at the meeting.

The student research competition generated more than 70 outstanding
papers, and the winning papers in each category (precollege,
undergraduate, and graduate) are presented in these proceedings.

This year there was expanded participation by the NSF research
directorates. There were more than 50 research presentations by
students sponsored by these directorates. In addition, each
directorate presented its education-focused activities in a panel
setting.

This report summarizes the conference activities, including
speeches by national leaders in the field of science and technology
education and the award presentations. The appendices contain the
conference program, a list of conference attendees, and a list of
exhibitors.

----------------------
NOTE TO READERS:   This electronic version does not contain any
figures, photographs or formulas.  See printed report.




NSF OPENING SESSION

PRESIDER
Luther S. Williams
Assistant Director
Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation (NSF)

This is the opening session of the Third National Conference on
Diversity in the Scientific and Technological Workforce. Dr.
Roosevelt Calbert, the division director for Human Resource
Development, will bring greetings.

GREETINGS
Roosevelt Calbert
Division Director
Human Resource Development, Education and Human Resources, NSF

Good evening. Welcome to the Third National Conference on Diversity
in the Scientific and Technological Workforce. During the next few
days, we will celebrate the achievements of the more than 300
students who participate in several focused and nonfocused programs
supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF). These students
are representative of the nearly 400,000 minority students who
participate in NSF programs and who are here in spirit today. What
a joy it is to observe these budding scientists and engineers at
work. There is a sense of pride, confidence, and energy that
permeates the air all around us.

To our project directors: You have done a magnificent job. You have
stayed the course. Without your wholehearted support, guidance, and
commitment, this event would not be possible. We at NSF thank all
of you. To our student participants: You are on center stage. I
know you are going to take full advantage of the opportunities at
this conference to meet and interact with some of the premiere
scientific and engineering talent in this nation. We are proud of
you and your persistence toward excellence. To those parents in
attendance: Thank you for providing that special love and security
that only you can impart to your children. Your caring makes our
job in education and research much easier. To Dr. Williams and
Congressman Stokes: Thank you for your long-range visions and
provision of resources, both human and fiscal, to address the issue
of improving education and research across all of this nation.

But in the midst of this celebration, we must also take time for
retrospection, because, as you have heard many times before, if we
do not learn from the past, we are subject to repeat it. We must
never return to the time when we do not make the provision of
quality education for all students a priority. This conference
confirms our commitment that all students be well served by our
educational system, with special emphasis on science, engineering,
and mathematics. Again, I thank all of you for your presence at
this momentous occasion.


REMARKS
Joyce B. Justice
Assistant Director
Social and Behavioral Sciences and Education, Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP)
Executive Office of the President

I am not Congressman Stokes, but I am here to bring you greetings
on behalf of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the
White House. It is a great pleasure to be here today. As one of the
people who attended the first national conference, it is great to
watch something grow and prosper. Science education and the
diversity of the scientific and technological workforce are
important aspects of what we do and care about in OSTP.

In August, the vice president, on behalf of the president, released
our science policy document. In our document, we called for work on
a national human resources policy. I am here to pay tribute again
to Dr. Williams and his vision. You have already moved far ahead of
where we are. You have given us the blueprint for extending science
and mathematics education and science, mathematics, and
technological skills to all Americans. This country will not
continue to be a leader of the free world unless we find ways to
increase the participation of all of us in all that is America.

So welcome. Have a good conference. Learn from each other. Renew
old friendships. I am pleased to be here with you.

Luther Williams
Thank you, Joyce. Dr. Justice is fairly new to the White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy and obviously has a very
important role to play in ensuring that the agenda reflected in
this conference stays before the administration.


KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Louis Stokes
Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on the Veterans
Administration, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent
Agencies (VA-HUD-IA)
United States House of Representatives

Good evening. It is a pleasure and an honor to be here tonight as
the keynote speaker for this plenary session of the National
Science Foundation's third conference on diversity in the
scientific and technological workforce. I want to thank NSF and its
director, Dr. Neal Lane, for inviting me to speak before you. I
want to also thank Dr. Luther Williams, the assistant director of
the Directorate for Education and Human Resources, for his
continued leadership in the areas of science, mathematics,
engineering, and technology education.

For those who may not be aware, the great strides made by NSF in
this area could not have been accomplished without Dr. Williams'
commitment to and vision for our Nation's pursuit of excellence in
science and technology. This conference--and most notably the
students whose work is being recognized during this forum--are a
testament to his commitment to this issue.

I am here tonight to speak on an important topic: science and
engineering education, especially for minorities. I have also been
asked to speak briefly on Congress's views on science and
engineering, and the role the VA-HUD-IA Subcommittee has played in
these efforts.

As many of you know, as a Member of Congress for 26 years and as
chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee that provides the
funding for the National Science Foundation, I am a strong advocate
of programs that focus on educating minorities. As only one
representative, I cannot present the views of all the Members of
Congress; however, as the subcommittee chairman responsible for NSF
and an advocate for the minority community, I feel confident in
expressing my views on the future of science and engineering
education.

It is all too apparent that, in this rapidly changing society in
which new technological advances occur at ever-increasing rates,
society must be prepared to face the challenges of a
technology-driven environment. To this end, Congress has worked for
some time--as has NSF--to improve science and science education in
America.

To its credit, the administration has also recognized the needs in
this area and has recently made efforts to improve our standing in
this arena. President Clinton and Vice President Gore have both
taken an interest in science, engineering, and technology. I am
sure many of you know, or will hear about, the administration's
science policy document, "Science in the National Interest," which
sets out the goals for science, engineering, and technology in the
coming years. This document charges the Nation to raise the
scientific and technological literacy of all Americans.

In their opening remarks in this document, the president and vice
president describe the importance of science and technology. I
would like to quote, just briefly, a few of their remarks:
"Technology--the engine of economic growth--creates jobs, builds
new industries, and improves our standard of living. Science fuels
technology's engine. It is essential to our children's future that
we continue to invest in fundamental research. Equally important,
science and mathematics education must provide our children with
the knowledge and skills they need to prepare for the
high-technology jobs of the future, to become leaders in scientific
research, and to exercise the responsibilities of citizenship in
the 21st century."

I am very encouraged by the administration's leadership with regard
to science and education, and its commitment to making an
investment in science today for building America tomorrow. I am
particularly pleased that, with respect to our concerns about
minorities in science and engineering, the document states as one
of its goals the production of the finest scientists and engineers
for the 21st century. Referring again to the administration's
science policy document, another statement that is equally
important is that America's tradition of excellence can only be
sustained by engaging the talents of our diverse population. In
fact, our Nation's strength was born out of our diversity and
diversity continues to be one of our great strengths. Yet, despite
America's emphasis on its melting pot, this Nation has not fully
utilized or developed the skills of all the people--especially
minorities. In most fields of science and engineering, women,
minorities, and people with disabilities are underrepresented in
proportion to the general population.

As we have seen time and time again, African Americans, Native
Americans, and Hispanic Americans continue to be underrepresented
and underutilized in a number of areas, but particularly in science
and science education. There are numerous studies that document
this fact; many of these studies have been directed by some of you
present at this conference. Part of the problem, of course, is our
educational system. Learning to be a scientist, an engineer, or a
mathematician takes many years of training and requires young
people to be involved in science education early in the process.
The K-12 educational system inadequately prepares or motivates
students, particularly minority students, for a career in science
and engineering. Twenty-five percent of white, 34 percent of
African American, and 37 percent of Hispanic fourth graders receive
science instruction no more than once a week.

Further, according to measurements by the National Assessment of
Educational Progress and other statistics, science knowledge and
skills of African American and Hispanic students lag 18 to 30
percent behind those of white students. In addition, recent reports
indicate that the average literacy levels for African Americans and
Hispanics ranged from 80 to 90 percent below that of whites for
certain language components.

As these statistics indicate, minorities are underrepresented in
science, and improved science education is needed for minorities.
Without a doubt, it is time to stop talking and take action. It is
time to make a change, to improve the science education of all of
our children so that we may engage their talents for the future.

Let me take a moment to applaud NSF for taking action to address
the problem of educating minorities in science and engineering. NSF
has worked to develop a strategy to confront the issue of
increasing the number of minorities involved in science and science
education. NSF has even gone so far as to publicly state its goals
of increasing the number of minority undergraduate science and
engineering degree recipients annually from approximately 14,000 to
50,000 by the year 2000 and to increase the number of minorities
receiving science, engineering, and mathematics doctorate degrees
to 2,000 annually.

NSF has developed several programs targeted at increasing minority
participation in the fields of science and technology, including
the following:

     .  Alliances for Minority Participation (AMP)
     .  Research Careers for Minority Scholars
     .  Minority Research Centers of Excellence
     .  Partnerships for Minority Student Achievement
     .  Research Improvement in Minority Institutions
     .  Comprehensive Regional Centers for Minorities

These programs are designed to involve participants actively, from
kindergarten through undergraduate school, encouraging them to
pursue careers in science.

As the VA-HUD-IA Subcommittee heard from Director Lane when he
testified on the fiscal year 1995 budget for NSF, great strides
have been made in this area. Dr. Lane stated that genuine progress
has been made in boosting the science, engineering, and mathematics
enrollment of underrepresented minorities. For example, AMP,
started in 1991, has funded 15 AMP consortia thus far, and the
aggregate minority science, engineering, and mathematics
baccalaureate degrees awarded for the first two AMP programs has
increased by 15 percent.

While NSF has worked hard to establish those programs and increase
minority participation in science, the VA-HUD-IA Subcommittee has
also taken action in this area. This subcommittee has been a strong
supporter of science education for many years. Since the
mid-1980's, the VA-HUD-IA Subcommittee has not only encouraged NSF
to improve science education, but it has provided additional
funding to do so. In the past 10 years, the subcommittee has
increased the budget requested by the Education and Human Resources
Directorate of NSF (which is responsible for science education and
for many of the minority programs) every year. The Education and
Human Resources Directorate has gone from a budget of $87 million
in fiscal year 1985 to $570 million for fiscal year 1994, a 550
percent increase over a 10-year period. These increased funds have
allowed NSF to expand its programs in the educational area and to
initiate critical new programs such as AMP. According to NSF
statistics, grant awards for minorities in all programs increased
from 141 in 1985 to 390 awards in 1994, almost tripling the number
of grant awards to minorities.

You may be interested to know that the increased fiscal year 1995
appropriation for NSF was signed by the president just yesterday.
For the coming year, the subcommittee was able to provide a total
of $3.36 billion for NSF. Included in this total is $606 million
for education and human resources, an increase of $36 million over
the 1994 level and $20 million more than requested by the
administration. This is an increase of more than 6 percent above
the current level.

Over the years, the VA-HUD-IA Subcommittee has articulated its
support for science, engineering, and technology education in the
House reports accompanying our appropriation bills. Once again this
year, I made clear my strong support for the NSF programs that are
designed to attract and retain more women and minorities in science
and engineering. In the House report, I also went further and
recommended to NSF that the AMP program be expanded in scope to
include a mathematics and science teacher education component under
the same terms as those currently serving the AMP students. Through
this expansion, the AMP program could address the critical shortage
of K-12 mathematics and science teachers of color. I hope that NSF
will work to make this recommendation a reality.

I am interested in other issues related to NSF as well. In the past
2 years, I have been instrumental in working with NSF in creating
a consortium for studying violence. At the request of the VA-HUD-IA
Subcommittee, NSF considered the feasibility of establishing a
center for the study of violence and concluded that such a center
was both feasible and desirable. For fiscal year 1995, the
subcommittee has provided NSF $2 million for initiating a
consortium of institutions for the interdisciplinary study of
violence. This study should provide valuable insight into the
problem of violence which could be utilized in our educational
system as well.

NSF has made great strides in improving science and science
education in America and should be commended for its instrumental
role in this regard. With congressional support, NSF can and has
made a difference in seeking new ways to build a sound future for
our children through advances in science and technology. In the
years to come, I hope that--through the Congress's help and
encouragement--NSF will be able to achieve its many goals in
increasing participation in the sciences for all generations, and
particularly for minorities. Science needs to be diverse. I look
forward to working with you in this regard.

Thank you.



SPECIAL PRESENTATION

Presenter:
Luther S. Williams, Assistant Director, EHR

Awardee:
Louis Stokes, Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on the
Veterans Administration, Housing and Urban Development, and
Independent Agencies (VA-HUD-IA), United States House of
Representatives

Mr. Chairman, to do this as it really should be done, regard the
words I am about to read to you as coming from the students in the
Summer Science Camps, Careers Access, and all the other programs
you have talked about, K-12 and undergraduate.

     "Presented to the Honorable Louis Stokes, U.S. Congressman,
     for dedicated, sustained, and outstanding leadership and
     service developing the nation's diverse talent in science and
     technology.  September 30, 1994."
                                        --Luther S. Williams



NATIONAL VIDEOCONFERENCE: POLICY ROUNDTABLE

PRESIDER
Roosevelt Calbert
Division Director, Human Resource Development
Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR), National
Science Foundation (NSF)

MODERATOR
Luther S. Williams
Assistant Director
EHR, NSF

PARTICIPANTS
Peter H. Gerber, Director, Education Programs, MacArthur
Foundation
Jaime Oaxaca, National Science Board Member and Vice Chairman,
Coronado Communications Corporation
Lynette P. Padmore, Professor of Biology and Project Director,
Florida-Georgia Alliance for Minority Participation (AMP)
James L. Powell, National Science Board Member and President
and CEO, Los Angeles County Natural History Museum
Diana Garcia Prichard, Research Scientist, Eastman Kodak
Company
Terry Cornwell Rumsey, Director, Office of Science Education
and Technical Information, Department of Energy


OPENING REMARKS
Roosevelt Calbert

Good afternoon. Welcome to the National Science Foundation's
Roundtable Videoconference. This videoconference is one of the
major activities of NSF's Third National Conference on Diversity in
the Scientific and Technological Workforce.

This national conference has the following objectives:

     o To sustain national attention on the issues and concerns
     that undergird the science, mathematics, engineering, and
     technology education of minorities who are underrepresented in
     these fields.

     o To highlight the National Science Foundation's
     accomplishments in broadening the participation of minorities
     in the science and engineering enterprises through its focused
     programs for this group.

     o To honor leaders in education and research who have made
     unusual contributions to the academic achievements of minority
     students in science and engineering.

     o To provide a forum for presenting and discussing the revised
     version of the NSF National Action Plan.

     o To provide opportunities for minority students to
     demonstrate their capabilities in the performance of research.

     o To allow broad interactions among the academic,
     congressional, business, industrial, and professional
     communities in the education of minorities in science,
     engineering, and mathematics.

Today, this teleconference will address the last objective. We are
pleased to have all of our guests with us today. Dr. Luther S.
Williams, Assistant Director for the Directorate for Education and
Human Resources at the National Science Foundation, will be our
moderator for the teleconference. He will lead the discussion of
several broad issues regarding the enhancement of minority student
achievement in science and mathematics, ranging from the federal
government's role in assuring scientific literacy for all citizens
to the critical need to educate minority students to be productive
participants in the workforce of our technological society.


PANEL DISCUSSION

Williams: I would like to start with an exchange on a generic
issue. The issue speaks to the frequently expressed call for
scientific literacy, which I think has been adopted broadly
throughout society as a national goal. The question is not the
merit of scientific literacy. It is, rather, the role. I would like
you to give your answer to the question, What should be the Federal
sector's responsibility for scientific literacy, compared to that
of other sectors?

Cornwell Rumsey: First of all, we all recognize that there is a
need for appropriate funding, and I am sure persons on the panel
will elaborate on that, but beyond appropriate funding, I believe
it's necessary for various sectors of the Federal Government to
become aware of what other sectors are doing, because an informed
constituency would be a supportive constituency. To the extent that
our representatives are knowledgeable about what we are doing and
are supportive of what we are doing, the public as a whole would be
more supportive of our efforts.

Williams: Implicit in your response is the notion that the Federal
Government--the various agencies supporting these programs of
science literacy--would profit from a communications program in
which the Federal Government would state its goals and objectives.
That is, the Federal Government should explain the progress it is
making toward achieving those goals, as opposed to simply evolving
its responsibilities for discrete funding and assuming that a
broader community actually understands them or appreciates them.
You also spoke specifically to that constituency. It seems to me
that something of the sort that I just described would be required
in order to have that kind of communication.

Oaxaca: You know we are going into the 21st century with profound
changes in the world, and these changes are going to be largely
driven by the one superpower that is left, and that is the United
States of America. I think we must all remember that whether we
want to accept it or not, any country that has unraveled, did so
because it did not meet the three legs of the stool that have made
America the premiere country that it is--a strong defense, economic
stability, and social progress. Now each one of those legs requires
a quality education. It requires the best and the brightest and the
vision of these young people who are going to be the leaders of
tomorrow.

If we look at Haiti, North Korea, and Bosnia, if we look at any
country that has just gone through major turmoil, one or more of
those legs collapsed. In each of those countries there was a very
small set of "haves" and a very large set of "have nots." That gap
is widening.

When Luther and I were on the Task Force for Women, Minorities, and
the Handicapped in 1989, the numbers we used were 85 percent of the
emerging workforce would be women, minorities, and the physically
disabled--I think that number still holds.

The problem that we face is not race or people oriented, it is
power-transfer oriented. People do not want to give up power. What
we must do is develop the talents of the whole American population
in such a way that we become even better than we already are. This
leads to people being phased into positions of power, positions of
policymaking, positions that are going to be good for our country.
We have to attack the whole education problem in parallel across
the whole continuum, and we have to do it with programs that go all
the way back to prenatal care, because the percentage of kids being
born in America to single women is pushing 40 percent. We start at
the very beginning with the basic premise that anybody can do it.
I am referring to what Jaime Escalante calls "ganas," which is
desire.

By the same token, in these days of budget constraints and a
changing environment, given the fact that 40 million people today
are working out of their home, we must have an initial mindset
about computer literacy. We have to jump on the information
highway. At the same time, the American public is going to demand
accountability, so we must have measures in place along the way so
that we can have a midcourse correction. All of these things must
be pushed.

Now when we talk about scientific literacy, look at the demands in
today's technology. I have a mother-in-law who is 87 years old. She
has to take 16 different medicines every week. We had to educate
her about the problems if she takes them out of order, if she does
not take them at the right time, etc.

So scientific literacy for someone who is elderly is different than
scientific literacy for someone who is pregnant or someone who is
in the first grade, or someone who is just getting out of high
school and is making the decision to go to a community college or
a four-year college or to work. If we do not upgrade to that level
in parallel with all the other things we're doing, then we have
made a terrible mistake.

Williams:  On the last point, I would like to use it to direct your
attention to another issue. When you were responding, Jaime, I was
struck with your general concern about engaging the total society
around the broad issue of science literacy. I want to ask your
response to that issue if, in fact, you focused it on the agenda of
this conference, how to actually change the landscape in terms of
participation and diversity, how to change it in a substantial and
highly expedited fashion.

For your response, I offer the following: One of the current
deficiencies, leaving aside how noteworthy the individual programs
are, is that this whole enterprise is not connected with the larger
national dynamic. For example, clearly, the country is dealing with
health care reform and acknowledging that this is a major
step-function, a transition essential for the country into the next
century. The country has dealt with fiscal controls, the deficit
reduction act (leaving aside how one feels about it), and the crime
bill. There is an emergence of reform efforts.

But I would submit for your consideration that mathematics,
science, and technology education in the specific instance of
minorities or even the overall education reform effort is not
accorded a comparable position in national dynamics. There is
something called education reform that is taking place in the
country but it's operating at a different level. It is as if it is
a desirable good, not an obligatory good. My inference is that
health care reform is obligatory. It has been connected to the very
epicenter of national transactions.

Powell: I would like to take off on that, Luther, and in typical
Washington fashion, not answer quite the question that you just
posed--I have learned that from watching some of the television
programs.

I would like to go back to the principle that underlies what you
are saying. There are clearly many people in this country who
believe that every citizen has a fundamental right to good health
care. Probably nobody would deny that in public, but in terms of
their actions and their votes, you would have to conclude that
people have different feelings about it.

If I go back to why we are at this conference, why you and I are
working with NSF and our colleagues are here, I think it goes back
to the fact that we believe that every American or every human
being has a fundamental right to achieve their human potential. You
could argue that is the most fundamental right of all. Therefore,
every human being and every youngster has a right to at least have
the opportunity to become a scientist or to learn about science.

If you turn from the principle of the matter to the practical side
of it and you look at a country as large as ours with all sorts of
problems and needing to advance in a wide set of areas, it is
demonstrable that we need to draw on the talent of all of our
citizens. If we only draw on the talent of half of our citizens, we
can not thereby support 100 percent of our citizens. So we have to
draw, as a practical matter, on the talents of everybody, of all
races and both sexes.

I think if you look at our history, at the problems that race has
presented for this country since the beginning, if you look at the
economic problems of the States and the major cities, I think you
would come quickly to the conclusion that education, and
specifically science education, is like defense. It is like
transportation. It is an issue that cannot be solved and will not
be solved on the State level. It has to be solved, if it can be, at
the Federal level.

Therefore, I have long believed that there is a very strong,
appropriate Federal role in science, engineering, mathematics, and
technology. Ten or 12 years ago that was not generally accepted.
There was a move to get rid of the Department of Education. There
was a move to eliminate funding for science education and NSF.
Fortunately, neither of those things happened.

You are taking this a step further, Luther, and asking whether,
given all of those things, we need a more targeted effort and a
much stronger effort to solve the issues of minority education, and
I am inclined to think that we do. I am inclined to think that
unless there is a coordinated national, Federal effort-- not just
at NSF, but at all the agencies--we really will not make
satisfactory progress on this goal.

Gerber: Luther, I think we have to be very pragmatic about this.
The Federal Government expresses a national interest. The national
interest is in having an economy that has more people supporting it
than there are people who are depending upon it and not
contributing to it. We have a society that would like to have that,
but we also have a society where some folks do not like to live
next to other people. They do not want to work next to other
people. They do not want to have their kids socialize with other
kids.

Now in the society we are talking about, everybody is mutually
dependent. It is going to take a targeted, strenuous effort on the
part of the Federal Government to express a national interest in
the collective value that we have for everyone to learn in order to
go beyond these individual preferences and social patterns to an
educational system connected to an economic system.

Therefore, I think that your idea of a strong communications effort
is very appropriate. The problem is that it is going to have to
confront people with unsettling ideas and cause them to think about
things in their own lives that are not consistent with these
thoughts that we are expressing here right now.

Cornwell Rumsey: Yes, absolutely. First of all, I agree with
everything that I have heard my colleagues say thus far.
Furthermore, if you take a hard look at some of the work that the
Federal agencies have done over the last couple of years with
respect to supporting science education programs, it has been good,
and it should be recognized. However, a lot of those efforts have
been fractious. They have been independent. The reality is that
there is a sense of urgency now that we have not had before and
there is a major need that we must orchestrate and be able to
articulate clearly for the American public.

A number of subcommittees are under the guidance of the National
Science and Technology Council, one of which is the Committee on
Education and Technology. That committee attempts to bring to the
table all of the Federal agencies that have a vested interest in
ensuring that the pipeline of future scientists and engineers is
assured so that our workforce needs are met.

The second need, but equally as important, is to contribute to the
larger goal of achieving a scientifically and technically literate
workforce.

A number of memoranda of understanding are currently being pursued
between the Department of Energy and the Department of Education,
between the Department of Energy and the National Science
Foundation. We are all in this together, and as my colleague to my
right pointed out, it is a problem that is not going to go away. We
really do require the best ideas, the best resources in the public
sector, in the private sector, and in academia to be able to
identify those opportunities for success. We then need a
communications strategy that helps people understand how that
success translates into making their quality of life better today
and in the future.

Williams: Another issue I would suggest is that developments in the
last year-and-a-half have served to raise the threshold against all
of our efforts and aspirations to move minorities into the
scientific and technical arena. They are manifold, but I want to
cite three developments and I would like your responses to them,
starting with Diana.

One is the advent of the information superhighway, which, as an
expression, is rhetoric, but beneath it clearly is a whole set of
fundamentally important issues that have to do with learning and
productivity; have to do with judicious use of technology in
delivering information; and have to do with access--a set of
issues, Jaime, that will be much more important in terms of impact
than the ability of your mother-in-law to take her medicine
appropriately--because the participation level is heightened by
technology. The issue of access is one variable, that in the
interagency context, has a very important role for a department
that rarely does business with us in an interagency context, and
that is the Department of Commerce.

Second, in the aggregate, what are we really concerned with in the
instance of minorities? What we often refer to as "science
education" is what I would term "training." An outlier--and, some
might argue, a counterproductive outlier--are the
multibillion-dollar expenditures of the Department of Labor.

It seems to me that in terms of its return to society, a Labor
Department Job Training Partnership Act program that attempts to
take a 25-year-old person in the City of Chicago and give him
short-term training to enter the computer technology sector is an
ineffective approach to problem solving; especially if that person
brings to that process an absolute paucity of knowledge of
mathematics and science. I am talking about an individual who has
not benefitted from the K-12 educational process and we're trying
to do a repair job at age 25 because the person needs employment.
So the second issue I want to raise is the need to conjoin training
with education.

The third point is one Peter mentioned, and that is whether the
evolving cultural conditions in the country--some of which are
promoted by sociobehavioral conditions, that is, are motivated by
fiscal stringencies, unemployment, job transformations,
etc.--disallow making progress in this arena on equal opportunity
considerations alone. In other words, is it good business?

So through three factors I have tried to take what would be an
otherwise generic linear problem-solving strategy in which we are
really calling for all of the players to come to the table, for
which we want to have an effective communications strategy, and I
have made it more difficult by saying that there are other major
players who are not at the table.

The implications of the advent of the information infrastructure
are unknown, but it clearly increases the complexity of this arena.
Certainly, in the sociobehavioral domain we need to candidly state
to the American people what we are attempting to do. Are we really
attempting to provide the opportunity for minorities to join in the
scientific and technical enterprise, or are we attempting to
redefine quality of citizenship?

Garcia Prichard: I would like to comment first on the superhighway.
One of the things that I have noticed is the whole generation of
people out there who are involved in the information system that
now have access to people in the university. For instance, at the
Rochester Institute of Technology, there is an Institute for the
Deaf. That informational system has opened up a whole new arena to
these people. The same could be said about the physically
handicapped.

As more and more of the young people get into that informational
system, it is very important for all of us to become part of that,
and there has got to be some monitoring, because it is surprising
what comes through some of those systems.

The other issue I want to comment on is not only communication
among agencies, but also their collaboration. If something becomes
a national issue, then all the agencies should come together and
pool their resources, because there is no question that the
fragmented dollar is not going to be as effective as a concerted
effort. So I would even go a step further in the communication part
of it.

The other part is the training. There are many gaps in people's
education as they move along the pipeline that make it harder and
harder for them to move farther along. So when they finally come to
a job, some people are well trained, others are not. There must be
some kind of intervention in these big gaps that we see, like the
transition between high school and college and community college,
etc.

Job training is a big issue. As we move toward a more technically
sophisticated society, there are more people left behind. Being
part of the Eastman Kodak Company, where we are "rightsizing" and
"downsizing," what I have seen is people who have been there for 10
or 15 years who have lost touch with the technology of today. They
are no longer as productive as somebody who is coming out of
school. So we really want the most trained person to come, and
science literacy and all the other comments that were made refer to
economic development and the urgency of getting to that point of
work based on technology.

Oaxaca: I think we face an interesting problem. Historically,
"minority" has been associated with an affirmative action check-off
box. Consequently, America at large, I am convinced, does not
really recognize these programs as an issue of national security.
They think it is a "gimme" or throw-away for the downtrodden, which
is not the case at all, because whether anybody wants to accept it
or not, the demographics are there, and I maintain that 85 percent
of the emerging workforce is going to be the so-called minorities,
and that is a lot of people.

So you have to change the mindset of Congress, of corporate
America, of everybody whom you are dealing with. You are starting
to see it in corporate America. You're starting to see it at the
conferences, where the recruiters are out there working all of the
minorities, because they actually do very well when they make it
through the pass.

At the same time, if you look at the policy that was set by the
Federal Government in the so-called defense conversion, we have
laid off thousands and thousands and thousands of the most talented
people in the world, the ones who brought the Soviet Union to its
knees, and there has been zero planning about how to utilize that
talent. Most of them go out and start their own little businesses,
which is fine, and that is what you want, but it is not focused in
any way to solve any national problem. It is not focused in any way
to set up for the future, to be the mentors and the guiding folk
for the young people who are coming along.

The issue of retraining is, in my mind, one of not being effective
at all, because you do not see retraining. In today's world of the
special interest group, the squeaky wheel gets all of the oil, not
just some of it. For example, in Los Angeles, they will lay off a
total of 25,000 people at TRW, Hughes, and Northrop and it comes
out on page 16 in a little article. You try to lay off 23 people in
the City of Los Angeles, and the world comes to an end because they
are civil servants who are working for the city and they have a
constituency that says the world's going to come to an end. Yet the
25,000 talented people you have laid off are Ph.D.'s and
communications scientists.

I have an example in which they called back a TRW employee who has
everything but his thesis done for his Ph.D. (in telecommunications
and all that transsatellite stuff) to retrain him to be an 18-wheel
truck driver, a nine-week course. Why? Because they get a tax
incentive at TRW. It is criminal, when these people could be
working on all sorts of other stuff. There is no training, there
are no programs, there is no tie-in. There is a full-blown
disconnect. And until, across the board, people recognize that this
is not an affirmative action check-off box, it is an issue of
national security.

I think we are now at the point where it is a marketing problem, it
is a public relations problem, because all of the infrastructure is
in place, but I do not think we can wait for the normal course of
events, because America only reacts at a crisis time.

Powell: I would like to take off on your first point, Luther,
which has to do with information technology, which I have long been
interested in as an amateur, and, as you know, I was a college
administrator for many years.

We have been hearing for a long time that the computer is going to
revolutionize the way we deliver education and the way people
learn, and I still believe that it will. I believe that very
firmly. But I would also have to admit that it doesn't seem to have
happened yet.

I think before we worry too much about the information highway, we
ought to worry about providing access to basic computing equipment
to essentially everybody, every student. And if you think about it,
I don't believe that we have approached this in a comprehensive
way. My understanding is that we are letting 1,000 flowers bloom.

If a school right beside Microsoft can scrape up the money (which
is a little easier if you are there), it can get thoroughly
outfitted with hardware and software and can make tremendous
advances, and I am glad that somebody's doing it. But I probably
would not have to go very far from here to find classrooms in which
it would be surprising to find a computer, and if there were one,
it would not be very well used. It would be an Apple II or
something back several generations.

In other words, I am saying that I do not see any coordinated
massive Federal effort to try to produce this revolution. I think
that unless that happens, we are going to miss a great number of
opportunities, and I think of it the way I think of the NSF science
education programs--the way they were not too many years ago, when
we were supporting what you might call pinnacles of excellence,
good work here and a good program there. I voted for these; these
were fine programs.

Now we are thinking systemic. I believe we ought to think
systemically about using information technology to revolutionize
the way we teach and students learn. I cannot prove it, but I have
a feeling that it could have more of an impact on minority students
who generally are more deprived and do not have access to this
equipment than it would on majority students.

So I would like to see if there is some way that NSF could take the
lead in bringing about this revolution that I see as inevitable,
but that is taking longer than I ever imagined that it would.

Gerber: I think a more fundamental revolution is needed, one
that sets high standards of learning for all students. That would
be a true revolution in this country. And I think following that
revolution, we will have equipment, computing power, and other
things brought to bear on the education of all kids. Until we have
high standards of learning for all kids, we are not going to make
the investment because we can slide off of that investment.
Those standards for student learning are going to bear on the
standards for teachers. They are going to bear on the standards for
the quality of curriculum that's delivered, the timeliness of the
materials that are available, the quality of the physical
facilities that are available.

An hour ago, the House was supposed to take up the conference
report, and I hope that they passed a bill which is intended to
elevate the standards through Chapter I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. If they did not pass it this year, it will
come back again. But I think that is the fundamental revolution.

And the point I would make about that revolution is that the
Federal Government has to articulate it, each community in which
kids live has to articulate and demand high standards for their
kids--not relatively high standards or standards that are
compromised by their socioeconomic status or some other factor, but
high standards for all kids. This needs to be a cry from the people
to the Congress as well as from the government to the people.

Williams: Your reference to standards leads me to another area
for your responses. One of the experiences NSF has had in dealing
with large urban communities through the Urban Systemic Initiatives
Program, has essentially three components.

One: Substantial confusion, vacillation, and I would even say
reluctance to make as a uniform condition high standards for the
entire enterprise, which is to say for our students.

Two: In many of the transactions in these schools--and I am not
implying that the schools in the 25 cities with which NSF is
operating are unique, but that is my sample at the moment--there's
an incredible infusion of resources in support of what I would call
deficit models for education. I am implying, at least from my point
of view, that this is undesirable, a deficit as opposed to an
achievement model.

Three: I have reached a tentative conclusion that there is a
correlation between the amount of resource expenditure and one's
ability to institutionalize high standards for our students.

My question to you is, what do you think is required to actually
entice these large bureaucracies to make the transition from a
deficit to an achievement model? Let me make clear the
implications. The achievement model says that a collection of third
graders must, in fact, have a series of experiences. In a deficit
model, some trivial fraction can escape from it--I am being
uncharitable--and move to an achievement model, but for the
substantial majority, what they get rewarded for is pedestrian or
minimum performance, and if that continues, then you cannot have
this high standard of which Peter speaks and you will not have the
outcomes that we have all talked about in terms of educational
product.

So the question is not trivial: Are there strategies that could be
employed by individuals who are outside of that bureaucracy that
could aid the system in redirecting those resources?

Let me be very explicit about what I am saying. Maybe everyone else
understood this, but what I have discovered in the last
year-and-a-half is that in very large urban communities, there is
a multibillion-dollar enterprise (when I say "multi," I do not mean
tens of billions, I mean hundreds) that is entirely devoted to a
deficit model.

Powell: I lived in Philadelphia for several years, a city that is
really coming back under an excellent mayor. We also had a
wonderful superintendent in Connie Clayton, who has retired. I do
not know the new superintendent.

But I think to bring about what you're talking about, it is another
kind of revolution along the lines of what Peter was saying, one
thing it would require is leadership, and it is not just a cliche.
You would have to have leadership from the mayor of Philadelphia,
in this case, and I think you would. You would have to have
leadership to get a high standards model adopted by the city
politicians, by the congressional delegation, by the parent groups.
You would have to have a superintendent who really was willing to
go out on a limb in favor of it. You would have to generate a wide
base of support, led by a few key people. Then you might have a
chance.

Padmore: If I may add to that, I think we have to tie high
standards to high expectations. In an earlier statement, you
mentioned the fact that you can have short-term training, but
short-term training should be focused. It is like employing someone
for 4 hours of labor. It makes a difference if that individual is
thinking, "I am working four hours and I am making $10 an hour"; if
he or she thinks, "I am working 4 hours to support my family"; or
if he or she thinks, "I am working 4 hours to build a building that
will support a structure that will benefit other individuals." You
have to tie in high standards with high expectations.

I think to the extent that we do that, our efforts, both in the
educational system and outside the educational system, will be more
beneficial to society.

Cornwell Rumsey: I think that the language that we use is an
important enabler that must be understood. We have talked about
communication strategy, we have talked about marketing. One
district comes to mind--the unified school system in Oakland,
California--that has had significant success with respect to their
systemic reform efforts in science and math education.

You talked about deficit versus achievement. Jaime talked about the
so-called minority. Language is important. If we are going to
advance these notions, making sure that we have all of the partners
who have a vested interest in the success, we must come up with a
new way of describing this so that people understand.

For instance, I have dropped out of my vocabulary certain words. I
don't use the word "minority." We talk in global terms about global
competitiveness, the global village. Human resources are global as
well. When you take a look at people of color and women, we are not
minorities, so I don't use that word. There are messages that get
transmitted when you use certain labels, for example,
"disadvantaged" or "people at risk."

I am the mother of an 8-year-old son who is at the point in his
development where he tries to validate his self-concept and his
self-esteem. Can you imagine for a moment being in his shoes,
turning on the television, and being confronted with images, both
overt and subliminal, that constantly say you are disadvantaged or
you are not quite equal?

I think we have to be mindful of that, and I think that we have to
find new metaphors and new descriptors to encourage everyone to
recognize the value that inclusion brings and the sense of urgency
that we have all addressed.

Oaxaca: I have a bit of a disagreement with Peter. I have no
problem with high standards. If we look at the military model that
was used in Desert Storm and again in Haiti (and there's the
classic operable workforce diversity, the only true one probably in
the universe), high standards went along with the best equipment
and they had no current parallel. We couldn't have one to the
exclusion of the other, because the training occurs and it is a
closed-loop system that keeps building up, either good or bad.
Alternatively, look at the Iraqis with lousy equipment and they
went the other way. They had high standards and lousy equipment and
they went down the toilet.

I hit the streets in South Central Los Angeles and East Los
Angeles. I talk to kids, and then I hang around with the smart set
and I talk to those kids, and they know--they are on CompuServe and
they are 6 years old. Go to East Los Angeles or South Central Los
Angeles and talk about CompuServe or Internet and they give you a
blank look. We have to bring in the equipment early, the very best
equipment.

We have a mindset, once again, that the groups in those areas merit
the used equipment from the smart set because they can use it, as
opposed to saying they merit the very best because they need it
more.

We also have a group in the science and technology community who
don't want any of this to happen, because they are like the
American Medical Association. If we only have one brain surgeon,
that guy can really charge for operations. Therefore, they will
bring in Soviet scientists at the expense of Americans, and they do
it consistently. Yet these people will come into town, get
financial aid, and then they will leave town with intellectual
property and compete against us--and we give them accolades! It is
insane.

We must take care of America first, and then worry about the rest.
But there is a mindset that a Viennese accent is worth 50 grand in
the marketplace and a ghetto or a barrio accent costs 50 grand.
That is dumb. We have to change that mindset, and I submit that the
only way we are going to do that is to work hard with the talent
that we have, and I think we have enough talent now to put people
in positions of policy decisionmaking, and then we need the leader
who says, "Here's what's going to happen."

When I was president of one of the divisions of Northrop, they
would ask me, "Why did you place so-and-so with that funny last
name or that Afro-American there?" That wasn't what they were
asking. They were saying, "I don't want him there or want her
there." And my answer was very simple. "I'm president."

Gerber: Earlier in his remarks, Jaime said that he disagreed with
the point that standards needed to precede and pull the investment
and the equipment. He sharpened my thinking on this. I do agree
with him that we can make a front-end investment. Unfortunately, in
education, we have a history of making front-end investments and
those front ends have ended up in closets and garages at schools.

What we also need along with the investment and these high
standards is a press on the schools to make good use of them, so
here are a couple of ideas that I have in that regard.

One would be that the colleges that have significant enrollments of
minority students--and still use that term--ought to go back to the
elementary schools whence those kids came and take a hard look at
the preparation those kids are getting, and exert some pressure on
behalf of the kids who are still in 3rd and 4th and 5th grades with
regard to what those teachers are doing, the expectations that
those teachers have, the satisfaction they have about the progress
that those kids are making.

Another suggestion would be that those who advocate and advance
civil rights on behalf of folks ought to visit these schools and
ought not to be satisfied with the attention given to these kids.
You know the old line about comforting the afflicted and afflicting
the comfortable--they ought to afflict anybody who is comfortable
with the progress that these kids are making in their schools in
grades K-12.

I think that the outside organizations based in the community and
the colleges that have to do a lot of extra work with these kids
both have a stake in a more efficient, effective, and equitable
system at the lower grades, and we need that press. Then, when the
investment is made, people will make use of it.

Powell: As a former college president, I would agree with you that
colleges, faculties, and administrators ought to be concerned about
what happens in the grade schools, but they are not and they will
not be.

They will not be because they have so many problems and so many
demands of their own. There are exceptions, of course, and almost
every university now has some sort of a program that reaches out to
a grade school or to a high school. I do not want to sound overly
cynical. I just think that they have so many concerns of their own,
so many financial problems, they simply will not help us solve the
problem of K-12 education fast enough.

I think information technology, the right kind of investment, could
do a lot more.

Williams: Your comments about the schools, resources, how to design
reform, and the specific instance of minorities stimulate another
issue.

There are individuals, albeit I would suspect small in number, who
have come to the conclusion that the following obtains. If you
consider the problems in the K-12 sector or even pre-K-12 as one
dimension, the transition to undergraduate as another (leaving
aside whether it is a two-year or four-year college), and then to
graduate education, one of the challenges is as follows:

Imagine the whole issue as one very, very complicated problem set,
so the issue is problem solving among the professionals who are
resident in the K-12 sector and in the college and university
sector. This was stimulated by your observation that they will not
do it. Even in the industrial sector, we do not have among the
constellation of professionals a cadre of individuals who know how
to problem solve across multiple domains.

Indeed, Peter, there is a contribution to be made by the collegiate
sector working with the high schools, but that is transitory. We do
not emphasize as a professional niche individuals who work in the
two sectors and who can, in terms of mathematics or science
education, blur the distinction between 10th grade and the
sophomore year of college.

There are no individuals who problem solve in the instance of
youngsters who go into the technological workforce with enormous
abilities, work for 10 years, and then the industries change. What
kind of retraining should they receive in order to continue to get
a return on that investment?

Professionally speaking, it is a highly bifurcated industry; that
implies that each of these little sectors is self-contained, and
they obviously are not. The suggestion, therefore, is that we
really need to grow (for lack of a better expression) a different
kind of problem solver and to stop taxing individuals whose
expertise really is to be quite good in this little narrow domain,
but who are not multifaceted problem solvers.

Long preface to the issue. What is your reaction to it? Do we need
such people?

Cornwell Rumsey: I think that your idea is one that holds great
merit. When you talk about those professionals who are in the
private sector or in the public sector and you look at exchange
programs that have worked quite well, the fact of the matter is, we
must kick it up a level. We have to think more broadly.

There are skill sets, problem-solving skill sets, that transfer and
ought to transfer between the private sector, the public sector,
and academia. We talked earlier about learning as a continuum, from
prekindergarten all the way through advanced studies.

If that is the case for the students who are traveling through the
pipeline, that should be the view of all of us. As we come from our
different perspectives, we should take a look at that continuum,
and ask a question: How can we contribute, given our certain sets
of competencies, to solve the problem? I think you are absolutely
right.

Garcia Prichard: I agree with you, Luther. It seems that the
educational system has been one-dimensional, or two-dimensional at
best, but the world and the economy are changing so they are
multidimensional. Not only do you have technological advances, the
information age, but you have a change in the people and the
demographics in the United States.

So if you take thinkers who are two-dimensional and apply them to
systems that are multidimensional, you're not going to get an
answer. What you are going to get is what I call a marshmallow
effect. You push in here and it pushes out there, so you never
really solve the problem until you come in together as a group. The
multidimensional and multitask thinker is the one, I think, who is
going to solve the problem, because you can no longer take this as
a two-dimensional problem.

Williams: That is generally true, and I would argue that it takes
on even greater significance in the case of trying to make progress
in the programs represented at this conference, because there are,
in effect, multiples. There are additional variables that are
brought to the process that enhance its complexity.

For several decades, we have been involved in efforts that are
reflected in this conference. Some progress has been made. The
progress is very unequal, as I implied this morning in my general
comments. I think generally one has reason to applaud what has been
accomplished from precollege through undergraduate in the case of
engineering, but we really do not know what was possible.

Do you understand the point of my comment? Even if we declare it
successful, on a relative scale, how does that relate to what could
have been achieved? So we need to understand that in terms of
production.

Second, the response (at least until recent years) in the case of
sciences and mathematics has been somewhat less than exemplary. If
in the next few seconds each of you had the opportunity to think
about a plan that took (in the classic scholarly context) the best
knowledge, practice, and experience that we have today and created
an agenda for the next 10 years, what would be the five most
important elements of that agenda? And the agenda for the next 10
years is to promote a step-function change from where we are now.
I should have said that, in terms of the goal.

What would you do, based on what we know? What is the return for
all of the efforts in terms of being able to design the future?

Powell: Just to mention two points that I think we generally agree
on, one would be to maintain high standards. The other would be to
provide adequate resources, and I would, as you can tell, heavily
emphasize the information technology resources.

Padmore: One that I would add would be delivering on our promises.
When we recruit undergraduates, we recruit them with the hope that
they will graduate in 4 years, maybe 5 years; but we should not
recruit them with the expectation that 50 percent of them or 25
percent of them may not make it through the pipeline. It's wrong.

Williams: So accountability, and for lack of a better term, a
contractual understanding with the student.

Padmore: Yes.

Cornwell Rumsey: I think that the strategy has to be well focused
and developed with the customer in mind, and I would define
mathematics and science at the front end of the spectrum. I think
that is essential.

Once we do that, we will be able to, through the process, ask
ourselves how we are doing, and if we are not meeting the mark,
step back and readjust.

Second, I suggest that the strategy should include the entire
family. If you are going to train a child, you must train the
entire child, recognizing that a lot of the values and the
principles that are instilled are instilled at home. And if you
have a situation where you have babies raising babies, then you are
missing that very important component.

Gerber: I would say that every family, community, and school ought
to have as its goal that all children know themselves as successful
learners by the time they are in the second grade. They ought to
know that by the joy of learning. They ought to know it by the fact
that they learned to read.

Williams: I agree with everything you, Jaime, and Terry have
indicated about goals for the near term.

Just to pursue the issue further, are you describing contemporary
America? I understand what you are speaking to in terms of goals,
but when I say that this enterprise needs a different kind of
problem solver, I am speaking in terms of extant realities.

My preferences notwithstanding, the substantial fraction of
American students do not come from 1930-model homes. The large
percentage of minority youngsters do not even come from 1950-model
homes. There is nothing that I am aware of in the near term that
suggests that it is going to be substantially revised. Therefore,
the student body that presents itself to American schools is
exactly what it is. In terms of addressing it, the problem-solving
construct has to deal with what is, not the historic glorious past
that might have been historic but was not glorious. I am not one of
the people who spends a lot of time lamenting what was lost by
time. But the point is, that is the reality.

So Jaime, you are right about values, reincarnation of values. You
are right about everything you have said. I just want to reiterate:
The job is a different one. I can not do my grandparents'
lifestyle. This even bears on how you can actually deal with
technology--your point, Jim--making the technology generally
available to youngsters. But in many cases, it is going to be
youngsters without parental supervision. How do you make it work
under those conditions--the real conditions, not the ones we would
prefer, not the ones we romanticize about?

Powell: I think the catch is to have high standards and increase
graduation rates, because most people think that if you raise
standards, fewer people meet the standards. Somehow, we have to
raise them and make more people meet them, and, of course, that is
very easy to say in half a sentence but extremely difficult to
bring about. I would like to think that if we brought all the
resources that we have to bear on this, it could be done.

We just set policy, Luther. It is up to you to implement it.

Williams: I want to raise a few issues about the undergraduate
sector. As you know, NSF and other agencies have major programming
in that arena. It is an area that obviously we are very concerned
with. But there is a view that, as is true with the K-12 sector, it
also is antiquated. It could benefit from an overhaul, systemic or
otherwise. If, in fact, Lynette, you are going to have the kind of
returns you are describing, should we be talking about reform of
K-16, as opposed to K-12, education and having a system work, the
entire system work, in the case of minorities?

The issue is that there are pockets of excellence. There are areas
where it is working. In the suburbs, it is working. Why does it
work in the suburbs and not in the urban schools? Is it high
expectations? I expect it might be; not only do we have to bring
the technology in, but from what I have seen, we also have to
educate the teachers to increase their expectations. You see it
when you go to a school board meeting. They bring graph after graph
that segments the minority students and they have an "oh, well"
mentality that they are performing below standards. There is no
accountability for raising their levels, and the number of deficit
programs and the dollars that they get perpetuates that low
expectation.

I would like to see more of a collaborative effort and a discussion
of what we need for college graduates and what we need for the
students to be prepared.

Oaxaca: I think with the infrastructure that has now been set up
for 4 1/2 years, that we now have to follow the precepts of total
quality management: continuous product improvement and eliminationi
of the non-value-added processes. It has to be process driven. The
world is not a snapshot. It is always changing. You are going to
have to have a dynamic process that you can keep adjusting to the
changes that occur, and it is a real-time problem. So you will fall
behind in certain areas and you will get ahead in others.

Williams: If I might editorialize, I agree with everything you have
said, Jaime, but I would make one additional contrast between
suburban and inner-city schools. In the inner-city schools, and
especially at the elementary level, basically nothing is expected
of the students. There is almost uniformity in terms of
performance, resources notwithstanding.

Gerber: Kids are growing up knowing how to program VCR's but not
being nurtured in ways that have them feel that they are whole
people and that they are people who are connected to the promise of
our society.

If we are talking about partnerships, Luther, with Commerce or
others, we have to connect these kids to the larger promise of our
society, or all of our techniques for teaching them to do things
aren't going to mean anything. That is a larger agenda that is in
the national interest and calls for real leadership from general
government people at the local, the State, and the national level.
I think they ought to speak to that and find credible pathways for
kids.

The kids have good crap detectors and they know when the speeches
do not have any substance behind them, and the "you can be anything
you want to be" speech doesn't ring true to a lot of kids in our
society. They learn to think critically at least that well, and we
have to be accountable for the fact that we are not fulfilling our
own promise in that way, as one of my colleagues has said.

Williams: Good. One of the things I am attempting to do as we
move through this discussion is to arrive at some end point, so I
want to probe another issue that I raised with you. What is the
next definitive step? Let me give you an example of what I mean.

It's remarkable but perfectly understandable that after 3 years of
national conferences where NSF brings together more than 300
talented young minority students from various sectors who spend
several days in Washington exhibiting their accomplishments, that
these transactions have been devoid of any serious participation by
the media.

The extent to which that is the case, I would argue, represents a
major impediment to making progress, even in mathematics and
science education, forgetting the challenge that is contained in
the larger issue that Peter framed of how to actually produce young
people who feel a sense of belonging and a sense of participation,
who feel that they can actually grow up and join this adult
American society.

Your reaction?

Cornwell Rumsey: I would like to see us recognize and celebrate
success in mathematics and sciences throughout the learning
continuum, on par with how we lift up and celebrate athletics in
society.

Williams: Anyone who has in recent times examined the issue--it is
not inconsequential that even the U.S. Congress, in spite of its
otherwise busy schedule, has given some time to the state of the
baseball strike--has to be challenged to move this issue as close
as possible to similar placement.

Oaxaca: It is a slow-moving thing. There are a lot of people
who, because the United States has always been preeminent in
research and development, assume that there is no problem. It
doesn't sell newspapers. I think it falls under the category of
what our chief scientist at Northrop used to say. He used to ask
the question, "Which is worse, ignorance or apathy?" The answer
was, "I don't know and I don't care."

That is how the majority of the American public views this, because
it is never really surfaced as a drop-dead problem. Unfortunately,
the United States only reacts to a crisis that is right at our
doorstep, and this is a long-term thing--it takes 28 years to grow
a Ph.D. I have a theory that if you can do mathematics and science,
you will learn how to read, but not the other way around.

Williams: Or if you can read and you cannot do mathematics and
science, it probably doesn't matter that you can read.

Padmore: I think we have to realize that educating a child is
the responsibility of all of us. It doesn't end with the parents,
and the parents should not assume that their responsibility ends at
8:00 in the morning and then picks up again at 6:00 in the evening.
It is a continuous process, and the same thing for teachers and
faculty. It has to be a continuous thing.

We have to be sensitive to what is affecting learning. If we have
a young man or a young woman who is working 40 hours per week and
coming into classrooms and falling asleep, we should be sensitive
enough to investigate that process. So it has to be a holistic
approach, and unless it is that, we are wasting our time.

Williams: Are there issues that we have already mentioned that
you would like to speak to further, or issues we have not raised?

Powell: I would like to make one comment to try to sum up my
thoughts. When I come to this conference and when I go back to the
great museum where I work, I know at a very deep level that the
problem is not with the kids (and by that, I now include all the
way up through graduate school). The reason they are not always
able to do it is someone else's fault. It is the system. It is us.

So I believe that if enough political will were raised to a high
enough level and focused sharply enough, this is a tractable
problem. I do not believe that it is impossible, difficult as this
is, to bring about what you are talking about. It could be done.

Cornwell Rumsey: If I had to sum up my feelings about where we
are now, I would say that the time is right, the conditions are
right, and if we can not make real progress now, shame on all of
us.

Oaxaca: I am prepared to go another 40 years.

Gerber: I am not sure that the time is completely right. I think
that there's very deep-seated racism in America that thwarts
individuals and policies and programs. We wouldn't all be as
frustrated as we are and we wouldn't be in such recursive cycles of
invention if that were not the case.

I think that a lot of kids actually have to save themselves. It may
not be their fault, but it falls to them to pull themselves up,
unfortunately, and society can join with those kids. I really think
that there is not yet a sense of the urgency in the country for
raising standards for all kids, for holding the adults who are
dealing with these kids accountable for the kids' success. I think
that the national leadership doesn't want to make people
uncomfortable by making that point, and I think they are going to
have to do it.

I think that we are going to have to, as a profession, at least in
education in my area, look at ourselves more sharply, and I think
that one way that we'll do that is by other folks coming in and
looking at us.

The kinds of things that NSF is sponsoring, talking about systemic
change, also cause us to reflect on things. So we need to be
supportive and we need to be patted on the back for trying, but I
think we have to recognize that we are a long, long way from truly
helping kids achieve what they need to achieve, which is to be
learners.

Jaime was saying that valuing education, valuing ourselves as
learners--and the belief that in doing so, one will have an equal
shot with everybody else for the rewards that our society strews
all around us and puts on the television--is just out of reach of
some segments of our society.

Williams: Perhaps at this point we will see if there are
questions from the audience.


AUDIENCE COMMENTS

Question: I am a middle school teacher in Baltimore. I would like
to know why NSF will fund certain things and then just cut them off
after three years or so, especially programs that are helping to
fill the gap of what the teachers can not do in the classroom due
to the overwhelming number of kids. I have also heard of people not
receiving the funding. Why? What does NSF need to do to keep the
flag flying?

Williams: Why did NSF make those decisions? Most of them were made
before we actually decided to seriously problem solve. That has
already been spoken about. We decided to move to systemic
approaches if projects are in the same community. For example, if
we were funding some highly fragmented, episodic (and in my
judgment, trivial, though important to one or two or five teachers)
ventures, we ceased to fund them and pulled everything together in
one coherent problem-solving domain.

I know that is disconcerting to some individuals, but I try to keep
focused on the customer, and the customer is the student. If the
students are profiting but the college professor is annoyed because
he or she did not get the grant, then that is secondary to the
problem solving.

Why three years? The answer is probably the same. We were in the
business of making grants, not problem solving. I assure you now we
are in the business of problem solving, so that kind of experience
should be minimal in the future.

Question: The second part is since you are in the business of
making grants, I think it would be fair of your section to have a
standard requirement regarding equipment or apparatus or materials
that should be in every school for the kids to work with, along
with that grant. Thank you.

Williams: And we intend to do that, again, by having the
equipment, as you heard here today, be a part of a larger set of
issues. The equipment alone is absolutely unimportant. Staff and
professional development without the equipment, without high
standards, are absolutely unimportant in NSF's view.

In summary, the point is that NSF is making a transition from
taking a problem set that has 10 variables and naming each one of
the variables a program, operating those in isolation and assuming
that we are accomplishing something because we have a large number
of grantees. The issue is not the number of grantees. The issue is
the number of students who are afforded the opportunity to have
challenging and quality-based education.

Question: I am with the California Academic Partnership
Program, and, more important, I am a school teacher in science. I
am very interested in the issue of technology versus goals and
standards, because neither one will work without the other. The
reason I have seen so many computers locked up in classrooms is
because there has not been the technical support. Have you
considered tying to grants that give equipment the requirement for
technical support in the classroom?

Williams: Yes. Actually we are considering that in a very
active fashion. In fact, we are considering the following. Making
provisions for grant support is probably only 50 percent of our
task. After we make the grants, do we not have an obligation to
provide technical assistance to the individuals we have asked to
actually implement the program?

So we are beginning to move into what I call the second phase of
our business, and we can not do that in isolation. This is a
perfect opportunity to make this a multipartner enterprise because
there are local industries, local businesses, private foundations,
and a whole host of individuals who could come together and assist
us in what I call part two of the process.

Question: First of all, I applaud you on this discussion. I
think it has been one of the most useful ones that I have heard in
a while.

I think that we would agree it has always taken a community to
raise a child, and so my question is whether you think it is
reasonable that there should be a children's bill of rights, that
a child should have a quiet place to study at night, that they
should have access to day care, so that the children can come to
school equally prepared or equally able to be prepared.

Oaxaca: I do not think there should be a children's bill of
rights. I think the Bill of Rights is there for all Americans. I
think that would only create a big police force to make sure it was
enforced, which would create another bureaucracy that would then
set up foolish rules.

My colleague here said it is a joint problem: It is parents,
teachers, government, corporate America, academia. If we as a
people fail in accomplishing this, the country goes down the
toilet, so we all have a vested interest. We have to get everybody
pointed in the right direction, because for a variety of reasons
that have been discussed here, it has not happened yet. I think any
bureaucratic rules that would set up that sort of thing take away
the responsibility from those who should have it to start with--the
parents and the schools and that system.

We are going into the 21st century. The politics are right. We seem
to be able to reallocate our resources in a better fashion now so
we don't have to put as much money into defense, and we can now put
money into economic stability and social progress.

Question: I'm wondering why the standards apply to the
students, when it was even specifically stated that faculty are too
busy to take the responsibility of making sure students get through
school.

The reason I ask this is that there are a lot of people taking NSF
money to do research, and I am always surprised when I come here
how few of those academicians are here participating and taking
these sorts of things seriously. What is NSF doing to ensure that
those schools are represented here, and that those people (faculty)
are doing their job? I think it is a multifaceted problem, and just
doing research isn't good enough. I am wondering why those
standards are being allowed to propagate.

Williams: Well, part of it is that you are looking at NSF, as
Dr. Powell indicated, growing out of a period of imbalance, when
the research enterprise was robust and the education enterprise was
very modest. That situation has been revised, which we are all
pleased with, but there clearly are two strong foci within the
agency.

What is needed is a set of activities that would more effectively
integrate education and research, and we are beginning to make some
progress in that arena. For example, the Faculty Early Career
Development Award, which now provides the opportunity (I think for
the first time in the history of NSF) for a scientist or an
engineer to make an application to NSF requesting a bipolar award.
"Here's my discrete research program and here's the educational
program, in one transaction." In other words, it is the kind of
proposal that should be submitted by members of the professorate,
not researchers. So that is a beginning step in the right
direction.

Question: While I applaud your ideas and thoughts on this
greater issue, there is one thing I have to ask of you. Let me
preface by saying that I have friends who have been teaching at
various levels of education longer than I have been alive--high
school teachers, administrators, etc.--and the one thing I have
found out from them is, even at the level of the district school
board, the members are really not aware of what is going on in the
classroom on a day-to-day basis. While Mr. Clinton can postulate
what should happen, once again, there is a disconnect between
reality and concept.

I would like to know what NSF or any of the other members here are
doing to make sure that the good intentions for which the money is
targeted are indeed occurring at that level of education.

Williams: Well, it is being pursued in various modes. At NSF,
the strategy we are using, and about which we are most hopeful, is
the systemic effort, because that makes every player participate.
As Peter and others have observed, it is impossible for
superintendents, or chief State school officers, or the school
board, or parents to be other than integral players in the venture,
because we--to be blunt--won't do business without them. That is
the way to get at that problem. If all the members of the community
will not unite in a comprehensive effort to address the needs of
the students, then there will be no program. There are other
examples in other sectors.


CLOSING COMMENTS
We have to end this panel discussion. I would like to express
appreciation to the panelists, many of whom were assembled on short
notice. Peter Gerber noted that most members of Congress are
committed this afternoon to debating the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, a very important activity, and they would not leave
before the vote. This group of talented people was able to come
forward and serve, which I think bodes well for the enterprise in
terms of the question I raised about whether we actually have the
requisite talent. I am more encouraged than I was before you
performed.

Thank you very much.



LUNCHEON FORUM

PRESIDER
James L. Powell
President and CEO
Los Angeles County Natural History Museum

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Jim Powell. I am president and
director of the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History and
also chair of the Education and Human Resources Committee of the
National Science Board. It is my pleasure to join you for this
luncheon and to welcome you and to preside over it.

I am very pleased to introduce our speaker, Clifton Poodry, with
whom I have really enjoyed chatting as we sat up here together. He
grew up on the Tonawanda Seneca Indian Reservation in western New
York and then moved a short distance away to SUNY Buffalo to
receive his undergraduate and graduate degrees. He then went on to
Case Western Reserve in Cleveland to receive his doctorate in
biology.

Most of his career since has been spent at the University of
California at Santa Cruz, where he moved through the faculty ranks
to receive tenure and become professor of biology, chair of his
department, dean of natural sciences, and acting associate vice
chancellor of the university. Along the way, he also served as a
program officer of the National Science Foundation.

The talent spotters here in Washington, D.C., noting this steady
rise through academic positions, have recruited him, and he is now
serving as director of the Division of Minority Opportunities in
Research (MORE), National Institute of General Medical Services at
the National Institutes of Health.

Along the way to receiving tenure and becoming a full professor at
Santa Cruz, as you would suspect, you have to get research grants,
do research, have undergraduate students, send them on to graduate
school and out the doctorate door. He has done that. He has
received grants from NSF, from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute,
the American Cancer Society, and others. He's written many papers
and he's served on a number of important scientific and educational
panels.

It is my pleasure to ask you to welcome Dr. Clifton Poodry.



KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Clifton A. Poodry
Director
Division of Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE)
National Institute of General Medical Services
National Institutes of Health

I would like to thank Dr. Williams for the invitation to speak at
this luncheon and Dr. Powell for the kind introduction.

First, I want to say that these are exciting times to be a
scientist and a teacher. Second, I want to emphasize that
minorities not only deserve to be a part of this excitement, but we
had better be for our own good! Third, I will share ideas on at
least one thing that needs to change in order to get more
minorities involved.

As I said, these are exciting times to be a scientist and a
teacher. In what seems to have been a blink of an eye, the research
in my area, developmental genetics, has moved in great leaps.
Topics that were imponderable 20 years ago, unanswerable questions
suitable for Ph.D. qualifying exams, are now being approached and
solved using new technology. Cloning important genes, sequencing
messages and control regions, using the polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) to detect and amplify extremely rare sequences were either
fantasy or beyond our imagination just 25 years ago. Basic
science--curiosity pursued to give us basic understandings of
nature--has provided the underpinnings for amazing advancements in
applied research. The first figure (see printed report) shows a
little history of the studies leading to the development of PCR and
some of its applications. As you can see, the applications that we
now enjoy from that basic research are important to our well-being
in many ways: health, food, economic development, and new basic
research.  The second figure (see printed report) shows another
history lesson in the research that led to discoveries on the basis
of Lou Gehrig's disease. As you can see, the products of research
in genetics, molecular biology, and chemistry converge to lead to
potential clinical applications.

Yes, it is an exciting time to be a scientist and a teacher.
Shouldn't minorities be sharing in the excitement? Of course they
should. Shouldn't minorities be helping to direct priorities for
research, including research to solve problems that
disproportionately affect our communities? Of course they should.
It goes without saying.

What will it take to get underrepresented minorities less
underrepresented in science, math, and engineering? I could cite
the depressing statistics of how far we have to go or I could list
the programs and the national efforts that are underway to address
the problem. I could tell you how programs at NIH are going to
address the problem. But I prefer to focus on more personal than
programmatic aspects of the issues and share my own ideas on what
needs to change at a personal, individual level.

Discovery is fun. It is motivating. Most of you already know that
and that is why you are here. From my own experience I also know
the importance of internal drive. I was an "underwhelming,"
"underperforming" student as an undergraduate. My overall average
was a C; not a high C, just a C. I was so naive that I thought a C
was okay. I had a job interview at the end of my senior year for a
position as a technician in a nuclear recycling plant--a veritable
Homer Simpson! I didn't get the job.

. . . Homer got it. So what do you do when you don't get the job?
I went to graduate school--to get a master's in biology so I could
teach high school and, hopefully, coach football.

Events during graduate research changed my direction. I recall my
thoughts late one night walking home from the lab where I was
working on my project for a master's thesis--on how a newt sheds
its skin. It was a cold night in winter in Buffalo, but I was
completely oblivious to the weather. I was warm from the glow of
discovery. I had just thought of a way to get a series of timed
samples after a hormone treatment from the same animal. No one else
to my knowledge had ever done it that way. I was darn near giddy.
The feelings of euphoria at seeing new things or thinking new
thoughts kept me going.

I applied to Ph.D. programs and took the GRE. When I scored in the
98th and 99th percentile I was sure there was a mistake. I went to
Case Western Reserve in Cleveland (the home of Congressman Stokes).
A couple of years into my Ph.D. research I knew, from my own
observations, that the structure of imaginal discs of Drosophila
was not as it had been recently described in the literature--and
that the interpretation made a difference! It was important. How we
thought of pattern formation and cellular communication now made
more sense. "Wow! This is heady stuff. It might actually get
published."

The next several months, as the manuscript went through 10
revisions, were hard work. But let me tell you that the feeling
that you get when you put your first manuscript in the mailbox to
send it off for publication is incomparable. I had three extra
copies in case the manuscript got lost in the mail. For weeks I was
beside myself with excitement. I would check the library for the
latest journals, worrying, wondering if someone else had made
similar observations, wondering whether I'd be scooped before our
paper came out. The published paper was 44 pages long with many
figures. The process and the reception of the final product
reinforced for me the pride in my work and the value of hard work.
My paper would stand the test of time.

I learned from my pleasures in research the value of patience, for
gratification in research is often delayed. Not every idea pans
out. Not every experiment works. But preparation pays. A thorough
knowledge of the literature, an experiment or analysis that is just
that much more precise than those done previously, the patience and
determination, they can pay off with new insights, new
observations, or new revelations that no one else has ever had
before--and that is a kick in the pants! It is well worth the work
involved.

Whether we consider an activity WORK is a state of mind. My
friend--scientist, teacher, and textbook author Vernon Avila--told
of how as a youngster he had to work on the family farm, often
digging and clearing irrigation ditches to keep water flowing to
the crops. It was work, hard work. And after work he and his
friends would play war. They would build forts and dig trenches.
Dig ditches! But this time it was play; not work, just hard play.
He realized at an early age that it is not the activity itself but
whether or not you are following your own direction that makes
something work or play.

Speaking of effort, I want to share with you a story that involves
effort and a man's refusal to adopt a victim mentality. Ely S.
Parker was an exceptional man from my reservation who, in the
middle of the last century, got an education and eventually a law
degree. But he was not allowed to take the Bar exam to practice
law--because he was not a U.S. citizen. Do you know when American
Indians were granted citizenship? It was not until 1924, when my
mother was a young girl. What would you do if, after investing all
your time and resources in your education, you were not allowed
even to take the certification exam? Ely Parker, not knowing that
Indians were supposed to be right-brain, nonquantitative thinkers,
went back to the drawing board and became an engineer, the first
American Indian engineer. Among his many accomplishments, he helped
build the Erie Canal and worked for the Army Corps of Engineers. He
served with Grant in the Civil War. Ely Parker penned the terms of
surrender at Appomattox. I wonder if I would have had his resolve.
I wonder what pushed him forward.

Almost as much fun as discovering something yourself is to watch
your students have the discovery experience. It is akin to being a
proud parent to see your students grow and mature and to share the
joy and excitement. Teaching is an endeavor that provides great
satisfaction but, as with research, gratification is often delayed.
Yet the impact of the phone calls or letters from grateful
students, generally a few and sometimes 10 years after the fact,
thanking you for something that you do as a normal part of your
profession, is tremendous. I know I have been moved by letters from
students long forgotten and as a result have redoubled my resolve
to be an even better teacher and mentor. It is worth the effort.

Another thing that I have learned along the way is that long lunch
speeches are not desirable. Brevity is appreciated. So I want to
conclude with two things that I have learned about learning. (When
an audience thinks that you are about to conclude they wake up. So
I have just told you I am concluding so you'll wake up and pay
attention. My mentor used to do this about every 10 minutes in a
1-hour talk. I learned it from him.)

The main reason we are here today is that there are too few
minorities in science and engineering. I am particularly concerned
about those who are lost from the pipeline, denied the opportunity
before they ever had a chance to know whether science, math, or
engineering was a possible career choice for them. I attribute this
condition, at least in part, to myths. Myths in education about the
potential of members of minority groups have certainly been
responsible for closing the doors to otherwise capable people. I
want to comment on what I believe is one of the most damaging
myths. It is damaging because so many people have bought into
it--parents, children, teachers, you and I. It is as Pogo said, "We
have met the enemy and them is us."

Why is your child getting C's and D's in math? "Johnny just doesn't
have an aptitude for math. He's more artistically inclined."
Why are you getting C's in math and science? "I am not good in
math. I am not an egghead; I am a people person."

Why are these students not signed up for algebra and a college prep
science class? "It is commonly known that minorities are
right-brain thinkers. They will be better off taking a course in
practical math and vocational training."

What is the myth that I am referring to? It is that natural
aptitude, more than effort, is the primary determinant in how well
one will do in science or math or in jobs where inquiry and
quantitative skills are needed.

Do they still give aptitude tests? I remember that my advisor said
that I should be a forest ranger in a fire observation tower. That
was because I was very shy and was uncomfortable speaking to
people. So I ended up being a professor.

I will not deny that there is a continuum in native abilities. Not
everyone has the natural talent to become a professional basketball
player, baseball player, or an Olympic medalist. But that pinnacle
aside, many people, if not most, have the abilities to enjoy
sports, many at a competitive level. One of my proudest
accomplishments is having been a third-string football player in
college under coach Buddy Ryan. I made it up to second string and
even had a partial scholarship by my senior year. Would it be
reasonable for everyone not destined to the professional leagues to
shun physical activity? Should only potential professional artists
learn to play musical instruments or enjoy photography or other art
forms? Of course not.

Learning, whether mostly physical or mostly mental, takes time. It
takes effort. Depending on the state of mind, that effort may be
work or it may be play. The notion that aptitude is more important
than effort is not universal, however. When Asian parents were
asked similar questions about their children's performance, what do
you suppose they said? Their response was that the children hadn't
put in enough effort.

I suspect that if we discard the myth of aptitude and instead
believe that all children can learn, if we have high expectations,
if we provide more opportunities for them to discover, to learn for
themselves, to get reinforcement for actual learning and to
experience the joy of feeling successful at learning (nothing
succeeds like success), they will learn that learning is worth the
effort. It will take a broad effort that will necessarily involve
parents, community members, teachers, administrators, and
scientists. It will be worth our effort.

My Hopi brother and friend Frank Dukepoo encourages students in the
Native American Honor Society to strive for a 4.0. In asking
youngsters to set real objectives for themselves he relates that
people often say, "I would like to get straight A's." Or "Gee, I
would like to play the piano like Mary." What they mean is, "I
would like to get straight A's without studying" or "I would like
to play the piano without having to practice every day." What do
you really want to achieve? And what are you going to give up so
you have time to do it? Will you put in the effort?

Being a scientist has offered me many challenges as well as many
exciting opportunities to be my own boss, to follow my own
curiosity, to stretch my imagination, to test my technical skills,
and to hold my ideas and interpretations up to any and all for
examination. It now offers me, in my position at NIH, an
opportunity to put my creativity to work in support of ways to
extend those opportunities to groups that have historically been
outside of the scientific establishment.

I am hopeful that, with the leadership of the National Science
Foundation, systemic educational reform will occur in our
communities, that new partnerships will develop to foster the
inclusion of minorities in the science and engineering workforce.
With your effort, a broader spectrum of Americans will enjoy the
fruits of a good education so that a subset, with representation
not limited to any particular group, will aspire to the challenges
and rewards of being a scientist, perhaps a professor, or maybe
even an administrator.



AWARDS LUNCHEON

PRESIDER
Diana Garcia Prichard
Research Scientist
Eastman Kodak Company

I would like to take this time to introduce our speaker. Generally,
the speakers that the National Science Foundation presents at the
Diversity conference have a curriculum vita much longer than their
speeches. Therefore, I'm going to select just a few things to say
about our speaker.

She is presently the general superintendent of schools in Chicago.
This is the third-largest school system in the country with an
enrollment of 411,000 and a staff of more than 45,000. She is also
a doctoral candidate in educational administration at Teachers
College, Columbia University. She received a master of science
degree in science education from Long Island University, Brooklyn,
New York, and a master of science degree in supervision and
administration from Baruch College, City University of New York.
Ms. Johnson has a bachelor of science in biology, with a chemistry
minor, from Johnson C. Smith College, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Before coming to Chicago, Ms. Johnson held numerous positions in
the New York City school system, serving as a teacher, principal,
deputy community superintendent, and deputy chancellor for
instruction.

She has been a guest speaker at numerous education association
events and a guest lecturer. One of the most interesting aspects of
Argie K. Johnson's career is that she was a research biochemist for
the Veterans Administration Hospital in Brooklyn, New York, for 6
years.

She has been the recipient of many leadership, educational, and
community service awards. I will just mention a few: a citation in
the Congressional Record; Outstanding Achievement Award from the
NAACP; Educator of the Year, Association of Black School Educators
of New York; Leadership in Education Award; Super Principal Award.
She is affiliated with the National Council of Negro Women,
National Alliance of Black School Educators, Phi Delta Kappa Honor
Society, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority.

Argie Johnson has had an illustrative career in education. I would
like to welcome her now.




KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Argie K. Johnson
General Superintendent
Chicago Public Schools

Never before in time has there been such a diversity of ethnic,
cultural, language, and religious minorities in our Nation's
schools. It is estimated that within the next 6 years--by the year
2000--one-third of the Nation's school children will be ethnic
minorities. In the city of Chicago, our public schools are
currently more than 80 percent minority, with more than 100
non-English languages spoken by our students.

The phenomenon is not unique to Chicago. It is played out in urban
areas across the country. In metropolitan areas, the average
percentage of students who are African American or Hispanic was 53
percent in 1991, compared to 20 percent outside the central city of
metropolitan areas and 26 percent in nonmetropolitan areas.

With the ethnic and racial diversity of our student body growing
more evident each year, what are the major issues facing our
society and our school systems as we work to educate youth for the
21st century? They are the issues of equity of educational
resources regardless of economic class, race and ethnicity, gender,
or special needs. Additionally, there is the issue of the process
of school reform in the context of national standards that must be
raised.

Where then do the poor, ethnic minorities, women, and those who
have physical and emotional challenges fit in the school systems of
the United States? And what do these students and their families
want from our schools?

They want nothing more than what is promised in the State
constitutions that outline the processes and procedures for
producing a literate citizenry. Today, a literate citizenry must be
able to address the issues surrounding science and technology in
our society. These families must be encouraged to take their
rightful place, to take full advantage of what our schools can
offer. The best education for some is the best education for all.

Why science and math? They provide training and ways of thinking
and processing information that are the skills necessary to master
other academic content material.

Where are we now with respect to the education of the poor,
minorities, women, and those with special needs in terms of
providing entry into the scientific and technological workplace?
How have national standards movements helped this process to move
forward? Is school reform making a difference? Are defining
national standards and raising requirements for student achievement
contrary to reform?

Data from the National Center for Education Statistics have
provided a comprehensive analysis of the condition of education and
a means to support conclusions about where progress is being made
in education as well as where it is not.

We can examine how much progress has been made in the areas we
previously discussed:

o How do children from low-income families progress through the
educational system in comparison to their high-income counterparts?

     - Children from low-income families are less likely to be
     enrolled in prekindergarten programs than high-income
     children.

     - First graders from low-income families are twice as likely
     to be age 7 in 1st grade rather than age 6.

     - As poor children progress through elementary school, they
     are more likely to be above the typical age for their grade,
     increasing from 9 percent in 1st grade to 19 percent in 4th
     grade to 30 percent in 7th grade.

     - Nationally, 11 percent of high school students from
     low-income families drop out of school compared to 1 percent
     for high-income families. This statistic does not speak to the
     enormous dropout rate in urban school districts where the poor
     are concentrated. There you can find dropout rates from 50
     percent to 75 percent. These children are the natural
     resources of the gang culture.

     - Among students who do graduate from high school, only 40
     percent from low-income families enroll in college compared to
     78 percent from high-income families.

These indicators suggest that children from poor families progress
more slowly and not as far through the educational system as those
from high-income families.

o Do students who are from low-income families and who leave the
education system make a smooth transition to the workforce?

     - Among high school graduates who did not enroll in college,
     those from low-income families were less likely to be employed
     than those from high-income families (49 percent compared to
     73 percent). Dropouts were even less likely to be employed.
     These young adults are the natural resources of the welfare
     system.

     - Data clearly show that African American high school
     graduates continue to lag behind whites in terms of
     employment, but even more tragic is the fact that, on average,
     white dropouts are more readily employed than African American
     high school graduates!

     - Statistics clearly show that educational attainment has a
     positive impact on earning power in males, regardless of age,
     but African Americans continue to trail behind whites in
     earning power, regardless of educational attainment.

     - Data for females is more encouraging, with educated females
     earning considerably above the average for high school
     graduates. Keep in mind, though, that the baseline salary is
     lower for females than it is for males.

o How are racial and ethnic minorities doing as reported in The
Condition of Education 1993?

     - While national trends for the enrollment of 3- to
     4-year-olds into prekindergarten programs have increased, the
     increase was larger for whites than for African Americans and
     Hispanics.

     - The percentage of African American high school graduates
     going directly to college rose 8 percentage points between
     1974 and 1990. During the same period, the enrollment rate for
     whites rose 14 percentage points.

     - In 1990, African Americans and Hispanics were about equally
     likely to go directly to college, but both were less likely to
     do so than whites.

     - Although overall scores have not changed much over 2
     decades, the National Assessment of Educational Progress gives
     evidence that the large gap in achievement between whites and
     minorities has narrowed substantially. African Americans and
     Hispanics have improved relative to whites in reading,
     mathematics, and science, although the improvement among
     Hispanics was less significant.

     - Public schools with few disadvantaged youth were more likely
     to have programs for exceptional children, diagnostic
     services, and extended day program offerings in their schools
     than public schools with a high level of student poverty.

As the bumblebee wings its way among the flowers on a warm summer
day, despite aerodynamic principles proclaiming that it can't be
done, so do unrecognized citizens with physical disabilities go
about their daily lives achieving what most of us would consider
impossible. Despite knowing what can be achieved by people with
disabilities, their representation in the scientific and
technological workforce is dismally low. Even with Federal
legislation such as the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, we
are painfully slow at giving access, not only to buildings, buses,
water fountains, telephones, and washroom facilities, but also to
things that really matter--educational programs and job
opportunities at the highest levels.

o How are our female students achieving these days?

     - An increasing number of girls are reported as having taken
     high school chemistry and physics classes.

     - The average proficiency of females taking high school
     science increased significantly from 1986 to 1992, whereas
     achievement of their male counterparts remained fairly
     constant.

     - While males and females have similar proficiency in
     mathematics in early adolescence, a persistent gap develops in
     high school. While there is an overall decrease in performance
     in mathematics between the genders, the performance gap
     between male and female 17-year-olds appears to narrow only
     slightly.

     - Despite all the efforts of the feminist movement, research
     into gender equity continues to show females remain
     underrepresented at the highest levels of management,
     commerce, science, technology, industry, and higher education.
     The only area in which women consistently outperform men is in
     childbearing!

The disparities between males and females, and among racial and
ethnic groups, continue as these students pursue advanced
scientific and technological education and enter careers.

     - Of the 38,814 doctorates earned in the United States in
     1992, 37 percent were earned by women.

     - Of the 19,043 doctorates earned in the United States in the
     fields of science and technology, only 24 percent were earned
     by women.

     - Recent statistics show that 83 percent of the doctorates
     earned by U.S. citizens and those with permanent visas in
     scientific and technological fields are earned by whites.
     Asians are far behind with 10 percent. Other minorities trail
     them.

     - Of the 19,000 doctorates earned in 1992 in the fields
     associated with science and technology, only 201 went to
     African Americans, 317 were awarded to Hispanics and a mere 47
     went to Native Americans.

The challenge to today's schools in particular and to American
society in general is to examine ways in which we can parlay this
valuable resource of ethnic diversity and talent into fuel for our
economic engine so that all citizens can realize the American
Dream.

o If education indeed empowers the citizenry, let us take a look at
exactly which groups are maximizing educational opportunities in
the United States in the areas of science and technology.

     - The U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
     shows a great disparity in the employment of African Americans
     and Hispanics in various fields of science.

     - While women fare much better, many of them are employed in
     the health care industry in low-paying jobs, such as nurses
     aides and licensed practical nurses. Few are represented in
     engineering and precision industries.

o What about the earning power of these graduates?

     - In the areas of computer science and engineering, the median
     salary for college graduates far exceeds that of graduates in
     other fields. Yet, minorities and women continue to be
     underrepresented in these high-paying positions.

As school districts grapple with the issue of setting high
standards for their students in response to legislation--for
example, in Goals 2000 Educate America--urban educators are
constantly barraged with naysayers who believe that high standards
will increase the already alarming dropout rate. Are we raising the
bar too high? Research by Angus and Miriel at the University of
Michigan and Northern Illinois University, respectively, shows that
since A Nation at Risk, enrollment rates in both science and
mathematics courses have increased. Even more telling is that these
increases were in traditional academic courses: biology, chemistry,
physics, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and advanced mathematics.
Moreover, enrollment rates in general science courses seem to be on
the wane. Changing high school graduation requirements, more
rigorous college admission requirements, reform efforts to achieve
scientific literacy among the general populace, and efforts to
increase the pool of potential scientists and engineers, including
minorities and women, have all contributed to this upward trend in
numbers and to the kinds of courses students are taking.

This trend was confirmed by the latest National Assessment of
Educational Progress, which shows that mathematics and science
achievement among students aged 9 to 17 generally improved after a
period of decline during the previous decade. This comforting
statistic has to be tempered with others, which show our children
well behind other nations in science and mathematics achievement.

The authors of Rhetoric and Reality: The American High School
Curriculum, 1945-1990 found that African American and Hispanic
students who increased their academic course load showed an
increase in SAT scores. African Americans taking more rigorous
courses also registered a decline in their dropout rate.

Assisted by the National Science Foundation and fueled by the
national standards movements of the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics, the American Association for the Advancement of
Science, and the National Research Council, the scientific and
mathematical needs of all children are being given great attention.

The urban centers of this country are where you find a
concentration of the poor, minorities, and the disabled. If any
progress in education is to be made with these groups,
concentrated, sustained, and systemic reform efforts must be made
in order to bring about change. The State and urban systemic
initiatives funded by the National Science Foundation will serve as
the catalyst for the reform of science, mathematics, and
technological education.

How can we attain educational parity with other nations? How can
the United States become first in the world in science and
mathematics? May I suggest the following:

o Adopting the National Science Foundation Urban Systemic
Initiative Goals in all school districts:

     - To provide the scientific and mathematical literacy of all
     students;

     - To provide the mathematics and science fundamentals that
     will permit all students to participate in a technological
     society; and


     - To enable a significantly greater number of students to
     pursue careers in mathematics, science, engineering, and
     technology.

o Embarking on a course of systemic change that includes, but is
not limited to, the following:

     - Building and sustaining a positive climate for change in
     mathematics, science, and technology education;

     - Designing, implementing, and institutionalizing a
     comprehensive program for improved student instruction,
     professional development, and community education that ensures
     high quality mathematics, science, and technology education
     for all students;

     - Advancing policy frameworks that ensure a rich, demanding,
     and rigorous curriculum of academic subjects;

     - Raising expectations and graduation requirements to reflect
     the skills students will need to be successful in a
     technological society;

     - Improving infrastructures (organizational, physical, and
     technological);

     - Aligning the resources necessary to support high-quality
     mathematics, science, and technology education for all
     students;

     - Reducing and closing the academic achievement gap between
     whites and nonwhites and between the urban child and the
     suburban child with respect to State and national norms in
     mathematics and science by establishing high standards and
     attainable benchmarks;

     - Changing belief systems with respect to the learning
     abilities of all children;

     - Examining our administrative practices and changing them in
     accordance with best practices in management.

The technical skills of a nation's workers are a critical component
of its economic competitiveness. The youth of today will be
tomorrow's workers and will be competing in a global marketplace.
They will depend on the mathematics, science, and technology
learned in this decade. Their ability to succeed after the turn of
the century is largely dependent upon what we do now to prepare
them.

Let us make a concerted effort toward celebrating our diversity
instead of defining our differences. The whole world marvels at the
great American experiment of a heterogeneous society. There is no
doubt that, due to our short history, we are making up the rules of
American society as we go along. We have made mistakes, to be sure,
but there is no mistake that America's diversity is an asset and
not a liability, and that her greatness will continue to depend on
the contributions made by all citizens without regard to gender,
race, income level, or ethnicity.

We cannot expect anyone to contribute to society unless he or she
is prepared. Schools are the place where this preparation has to
take place. If America can dedicate a decade to developing the
finest defense systems that money can buy, what precludes it from
doing the same with education? What holds America back from
investing in the education of its citizens? I suggest to you that
an educated citizenry is a very powerful weapon.

My sincere congratulations are extended to those of you who will
receive awards today. Your accomplishments are a testament to what
can be achieved by those who overcome obstacles, put on blinders to
distractions, and participate fully in the American educational
process. Your task, however, is not complete. By earning
recognition, you also take on the greater burden of serving as
mentors to those who will follow you. I urge you to accept the
challenge. We who work in schools every day need your help, good
will, and splendid example as role models. There are too few of you
achieving at this level, so the burden is even greater. I hope that
you will accept this challenge in the spirit of this significant
lyric:

     The road is long, with many a winding turn;
     Which leads to who knows where, who knows where?
     But I'm strong, strong enough to carry him;
     He ain't heavy--he's my brother.

Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to address you.



AWARD PRESENTATIONS

PRESIDER
Diana Garcia Prichard
Research Scientist
Eastman Kodak Company

An integral part of the National Science Foundation's National
Conference on Diversity in the Scientific and Technological
Workforce has been the presentation of awards to outstanding
students, researchers, and leaders in the field of science,
engineering, mathematics, and technology education for minority
groups underrepresented in these fields. This third year of the
conference we continue this tradition. More than 300 student
participants in NSF-sponsored research activities have presented
their findings here in panel and poster settings. The disciplines
represented include chemistry, physics, engineering, biology, and
the social sciences.

Students entered the research competition by submitting a formal
research paper based on their conference presentations. Papers were
reviewed by NSF research scientists and science educators, and
finalists were selected in three categories: precollege,
undergraduate, and graduate. The National Science Foundation staff
judges attended the presentations of all the finalists, and winners
have been selected.

Before we present the awards, we would like to formally recognize
the many NSF scientists, mathematicians, engineers, and science
educators who volunteered their time to review the research papers
and to judge the presentations. Those of you who are here today,
please stand and receive your well-deserved round of applause.


STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS

PRECOLLEGE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor: National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
Presenter: Marvin Druger, President, NSTA
Awardee: Terrence R. Ruffin, Laney High School, 9th Grade,
University of North Carolina Summer Science Camp Program
Title of Paper: "Barrier Island Topography and Vegetation Zones"


PRECOLLEGE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor: National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
Presenter: Marvin Druger, President, NSTA
Awardee: Felicia Nicole Colon-Barnes, Holy Name Academy, 9th Grade,
Seattle University Summer Science Camp Program
Title of Paper: "Aerodynamics in Action"


PRECOLLEGE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor: National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
Presenter: Marvin Druger, President, NSTA
Awardee: Roosevelt R. Love, Beaumont High School, Senior, St.
Louis, Missouri, Comprehensive Regional Centers for Minorities
Program
Title of Paper: "Study of the St. Louis Metropolitan Metro-Link
Light Rail Station Canopies"


PRECOLLEGE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor: National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
Presenter: Marvin Druger, President, NSTA
Awardee: Liza Gabriella Ruvalcaba, Soccorro High School, 10th
Grade, El Paso, Texas, Comprehensive Regional Centers for
Minorities Program
Title of Paper: "Drainage Time of a Roughly Cylindrical Container
as a Function of Hole Diameter and Initial Water Height"

The National Science Teachers Association is the largest
organization committed to the improvement of science education in
all areas, from preschool to college. Currently, NSTA has about
50,000 members. We provide a variety of journals, conventions,
student services, competitions, awards, and many other services.
If anybody would like to join, I just happen to have some cards in
my pocket. As president, I'm empowered to give a 10 percent
discount, so anybody who'd like to join, please see me.

As president, I also have the privilege and great honor to attend
this conference, and notwithstanding the fine presentations of my
distinguished colleagues, I was most impressed by the student
presentations. More than 40 presentations at this conference were
made by middle and high school students who are participants in the
Summer Science Camps (SSC) and the Comprehensive Regional Centers
for Minorities (CRCM) programs. The NSF, SSC, and CRCM programs
served approximately 50,000 precollege students in 1993, and these
students are our future scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.

What impressed me most was how bright, creative, poised, and
articulate these students are. They're excited about science and
they know what they're talking about. Somehow, I can't remember
being that smart when I was that young. This is a wonderful
opportunity to see what our scientists of the future are like, and
they make me feel very optimistic about this future.

Obviously, it was very difficult to select winners. To all the
students, I can only say that everybody here is obviously a winner
as a result of this experience. To all of the students who are
here, you will not forget this. It will become part of what you
are; you will remember the friends you met here, and you will
remember the excitement of being at a professional scientific
meeting.

A famous saying that I just made up: "We learn from everyone whom
we meet, and everything that we do becomes part of what we are." So
I'm very happy to see that these students have learned something
here and will go away with a good feeling about themselves and
about their projects.

There are two categories of "winner-winners," which I'll have to
call them, since everybody's a winner. One set of winner-winners
came from the Summer Science Camp Program, and two winners are from
the Comprehensive Regional Centers for Minorities. Each of the four
students will receive from the National Science Teachers
Association a plaque, a subscription to Discovery magazine or
Quantum magazine, and--because we like to help them go far in
life--they also will receive an open airline ticket to anywhere in
the United States, roundtrip, of course.

--Marvin Druger


UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor: Phi Beta Kappa
Presenter: Virginia R. Ferris, Executive Committee, Phi Beta Kappa
and Professor of Entomology, Purdue University
Awardee: Monica Renee Page, Tennessee State University, Senior,
Research Improvement in Minority Institutions Program
Title of Paper: "Application of Interval Modeling Techniques to
Robust Control of Slewing Beams with Loads"
Awardee: Gisela Rodriguez Rosado, University of Puerto Rico,
Senior, Research Careers for Minority Scholars Program
Title of Paper:  "Triisopropylsilanol: A New Phase Transfer
Catalyst for Dehydrohalogenation"

The Phi Beta Kappa Society is honored to participate in this
ceremony and to recognize the achievements of undergraduate
students. The purpose of the Phi Beta Kappa Society is to encourage
and further education in the liberal arts and sciences. We
recognize that the role of science is often undervalued in
education and we also recognize the importance for the country of
encouraging undergraduates, particularly minority students, in
scientific study and research.

Phi Beta Kappa also recognizes the important role that
undergraduate student research plays in strengthening interactions
between faculty members and students, and how much research
encourages students not only to complete their undergraduate work,
but also to pursue advanced studies. I speak this from the heart
because I am a practicing bench scientist myself and also a
teacher.

NSF's leadership role in providing opportunities for minority
students to participate in undergraduate research is amply
illustrated by the number of undergraduate research presentations
in science, engineering, and mathematics at this conference. Of the
more than 300 research presentations, approximately 42 percent were
from NSF's premiere undergraduate programs, the Alliances for
Minority Participation (AMP) Program and the Research Careers for
Minority Scholars Program. These programs have an outstanding
record of providing the support needed for minority students,
enabling them to pursue degrees in science, engineering, and
mathematics at the undergraduate level, and together they currently
support more than 50,000 of the next generation of minority
scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.

Papers were submitted by students representing these two programs
and by students sponsored by other directorates at NSF. I should
note that because of the large number of high-quality papers
submitted to the competition, NSF has joined with Phi Beta Kappa to
present two awards today. Both students will receive a check for
$500 and a plaque from Phi Beta Kappa honoring their achievements.

--Virginia Ferris


GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor:  Council of Graduate Schools (CGS)
Presenter:  Anne S. Pruitt, Dean in Residence, CGS, and member, NSF
Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering
Awardee:  Thomas Tenorio, New Mexico State University, Ph.D.
student, Research Improvement in Minority Institutions Program
Title of Paper:  "Creating an Object-Oriented Test Repository"


GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH AWARDS
Sponsor:  Council of Graduate Schools (CGS)
Presenter:  Anne S. Pruitt, Dean in Residence, CGS, and member, NSF
Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering
Awardee:  Nathaniel A. Whitmal, III, Northwestern University, Ph.D.
candidate, Engineering Directorate Program
Title of Paper:  "Noise Reduction Methods for Speech Enhancement"


I have two awards to make, but first I want to join the other
presenters in saying how impressive this conference has been and
that we are, indeed, working with the scientists of the future.
The Council of Graduate Schools is honored to present the awards
for the outstanding graduate student research papers and
presentations at this conference. We present the award in
recognition of NSF's leadership role in providing quality education
for minority students who are underrepresented in science,
mathematics, and engineering, and as a reflection of our strong
support for NSF's efforts.

The graduate students who participated in this competition
represent two programs of the Directorate for Education and Human
Resources that focus on graduate education for minority students.
One program is the Minority Research Centers of Excellence, which
seeks to update the capabilities of the most research-productive
minority institutions and to provide increased opportunities for
minority faculty and students to engage in competitive research.
The second program is Research Improvement in Minority
Institutions, which provides grants to strengthen the research
capabilities and infrastructures of institutions with substantial
minority enrollments that have graduate programs in science or
engineering. Together, these programs are responsible for a
significant increase in the number of minority doctoral candidates
and graduates in the last 3 years.

On behalf of the Council of Graduate Schools, I would like to
present each of the winners with a check for $500 and a plaque that
reads, "The Graduate Student Achievement Award is presented by the
Council of Graduate Schools in recognition of an outstanding
research paper presented at the National Science Foundation
Conference, Diversity in the Scientific and Technological
Workforce, October 1, 1994, Washington, D.C." It is signed by Jules
B. LaPidus, President of the Council of Graduate Schools.

--Anne Pruitt


SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS LEADERSHIP AWARDS
The science, engineering, mathematics, and technology (SMET)
education of minority students requires a comprehensive effort
involving all segments of the community, including administrators,
teachers, parents, and private-sector corporations. Some persons
and institutions have a history of involvement in this effort and
stand out as leaders in the field of science and education equity;
a few persons have devoted their entire professional careers to the
effort. NSF has created several awards to recognize and honor these
persons and institutions for their creativity, dedication, and
long-term efforts to expand educational options for minority
students in science and technology. Their efforts have resulted
directly in increased participation by minority students in the
science and technology enterprise.

The award presentations are summarized below. The awardees each
receive a hand-lettered, framed certificate signed by the director,
NSF, and the assistant director, Education and Human Resources.



EDUCATOR ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Eugene DeLoatch, Dean, School of Engineering, Morgan
State University
Awardee:  Eloy Rodriguez
James Perkins Professor of Environmental Studies, Cornell
University


Dr. Eloy Rodriguez, former professor in the School of Biological
Sciences at the University of California at Irvine, is an
internationally recognized phytochemist, toxicologist, and
dermatoxicologist. He received his B.A. degree in zoology from the
University of Texas at Austin and his Ph.D. in photochemistry and
plant biology at the same university. During his professional
career, he was an Endo-American Fulbright Senior Scholar Lecturer,
a visiting professor and research scientist at the University of
British Columbia, an invited lecturer of the Chinese Academy of
Sciences in the People's Republic of China, and a visiting
professor and research scientist at the University of California at
San Francisco. Dr. Rodriguez currently holds a chair at Cornell
University.

Dr. Rodriguez was raised in Hidalgo County in south Texas, then the
poorest per capita region in the United States. Ever conscious of
his background, he continues to make special efforts to deliver
lectures throughout the southwestern United States, inspiring
students to consider careers in science, mathematics, engineering,
and technology. He has a special commitment to promote academic
excellence among Chicano, Latino, and other minority students in
science and engineering.

His efforts have led to the development of several programs: the
International Chicano Studies Program, which involves the Chicano
community in seminars, special faculty research projects, and the
arts; and the Kids Investigating and Discovering Science Program
(KIDS), which hosts summer and Saturday science instruction for
minority students in kindergarten through 6th grade and their
parents. Students in the KIDS Program participate in hands-on data
collection and analysis and exchange scientific data with students
at schools throughout the Nation and world through the KIDS Network
Innovative Telecommunication Program. Dr. Rodriguez also is the
former director of the California Alliances for Minority
Participation program grant from the National Science Foundation.
Dr. Rodriguez has received the prestigious American Association for
Higher Education Hispanic Caucus Award and the first Hispanic
Educator Award from the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

--Eugene DeLoatch


EDUCATOR ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Eugene DeLoatch, Dean, School of Engineering, Morgan
State University
Awardee:  Mary Hatwood Futrell
Past President, National Education Association and Director,
Institute for Curriculum, Standards, and Technology


Dr. Mary Hatwood Futrell began her formal career in education as a
high school teacher in Alexandria, Virginia, in 1963. She received
her bachelor's degree in business education from Virginia State
College (now University) and her master's and doctorate in
education from George Washington University. She moved through the
ranks of the National Education Association (NEA) to become the
president of this 2.2-million-member organization in 1983.

The development of standards for science and technology education
is critical to the national effort to reform science and
mathematics education for all children. During Dr. Futrell's 6-year
tenure as NEA president, she led the organization's collaborative
effort with other national organizations to develop, disseminate,
and implement national standards for mathematics and science
education. For example, NEA not only endorsed the standards of the
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) but also
disseminated them to its more than 2 million members through State
NEA presidents and national board members and supported
implementation efforts. From her position as a board member of the
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), Dr.
Futrell facilitated collaboration among NBPTS, NCTM, and NSTA in
the development of national teacher certification standards.

Dr. Futrell has been honored by numerous organizations, including
the Congressional Black Caucus, the Virginia Women's Hall of Fame,
Ebony magazine (Outstanding US Black Professional), Ladies Home
Journal (100 Top Women in America), the NAACP (President's Award),
and the National Council on Bilingual Education. She holds honorary
doctoral degrees from many universities, including Spelman College,
North Carolina Central, Xavier University, the University of
Michigan, and George Washington University. She has published in
Phi Delta Kappan, the Phi Kappa Phi Journal, and the Journal of
Negro Education, among others. She holds office in many national
and international organizations, including the Institute for
Educational Leadership, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching, and the National Commission on Working Women. She is
also no stranger to the National Science Foundation, having served
on the EHR Directorate Advisory Committee.

Currently an associate professor, Department of Educational
Leadership, and director of the Institute for Curriculum Standards
and Technology at George Washington University, Dr. Futrell
continues her efforts as an advocate for educational reform. As
president of Education International, a 20-million-member
organization with representatives from 130 countries, she is
leading the organization's effort to provide equal access to a
quality education for all children. She also serves as project
director, Annenberg Mathematics and Science Teacher Leadership Corp
Project. In this position, she is responsible for training 100
minority teachers nationwide as leaders in the science,
mathematics, and technology education reform movement. Over the
last 2 years, these teachers have reached approximately 5,000 of
their colleagues.

--Eugene DeLoatch



EDUCATOR ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Eugene DeLoatch, Dean, School of Engineering, Morgan
State University
Awardee:  Dr. Freeman A. Hrabowski, III
President, University of Maryland at Baltimore County

Dr. Freeman A. Hrabowski, III, is the fifth president of the
University of Maryland at Baltimore County. At the age of 42, he is
one of the youngest African American presidents of a major American
institution of higher education. He is recognized nationally for
establishing and managing exemplary education programs, especially
for African Americans who will be prominent among the scientists
and engineers of the 21st century.

Dr. Hrabowski's hometown is Birmingham, Alabama. He graduated from
high school when he was 15 years old, and at the age of 19 he
received his undergraduate degree in mathematics with highest
honors from Hampton Institute (now Hampton University). He attended
the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he earned a
master of arts in mathematics and a Ph.D. in higher education
administration.

Dr. Hrabowski has served in several academic and administrative
positions at the University of Illinois, Alabama A&M University,
and Coppin State College in Baltimore. He came to the University of
Maryland, Baltimore County, in 1987 as vice provost and became
executive vice president and vice provost 3 years later. He was
inaugurated as president of UMBC on September 24, 1993.

President Hrabowski is perhaps best known for the extraordinary
success of the Meyerhoff Scholars Program at UMBC. This program,
which began in 1988 with a $522,000 grant from the Robert and Jane
Meyerhoff Foundation, is designed to increase student retention and
improve the quality of the UMBC student body. This is accomplished
through the recruitment of high-ability African American students
who are awarded full 4-year scholarships. A great deal of personal
guidance is provided to get them into the best graduate schools.

The Meyerhoff Scholarship Program also receives funding from the
National Science Foundation, Research Careers for Minority Scholars
Program.

One of Dr. Hrabowski's favorite poems is "Hold Fast to Dreams" by
Langston Hughes. The poem reads,

     Hold fast to dreams,
     For if dreams die,
     Life is a broken-winged bird that cannot fly.
     Hold fast to dreams,
     For when dreams go,
     Life is a barren field frozen with snow.

Freeman Hrabowski, it is a delightful pleasure for me, as one of
your higher education colleagues in the State of Maryland, to award
you the NSF Educator Award for 1994. You have truly helped students
hold fast to their dreams.

--Eugene DeLoatch



INSTITUTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Jaime Oaxaca, National Science Board Member and Vice
Chairman, Coronado Communications Corporation
Awardee:  Arizona State University


Arizona State University is located near the center of metropolitan
Phoenix in Maricopa County, where nearly 60 percent of the State's
population resides. While the university has been designated as a
Carnegie Research I Institution and has an enrollment of
approximately 44,000 full-time and part-time students, emphasis is
placed on increasing the academic achievement of minorities, who
are underrepresented in science and engineering.

Arizona State University prides itself on being one of the leading
universities in the Nation in developing programs to address key
issues to increase the participation and accomplishments of
underrepresented minorities in science, engineering, and
mathematics disciplines. These programs include a major role in
initiating and implementing a successful AMP program, an
undergraduate program supported by NSF to significantly increase
the number of minorities who earn baccalaureate degrees in science,
engineering, and mathematics disciplines, and the Project to
Improve Minority Education (PRIME), a precollege program that
introduced systemic curriculum changes with high academic
expectations. PRIME has been in continuous operation in Arizona
since 1988 and has served more than 50,000 students. The Institute
for Strengthening Underrepresented Minority Students in Mathematics
and Science (SUMMS) has been successful in increasing the number of
minority students who are enrolled as mathematics majors at Arizona
State University. Project 1000 is a program that has made an impact
on the number of minority students who enter graduate school to
study science, engineering, and mathematics.

For its commitment of ensuring that minorities play an expanded and
significant role in the university environment as well as in
science, engineering, and mathematics, this NSF Institutional Award
for 1994 is presented to Arizona State University.

--Jaime Oaxaca



INSTITUTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Jaime Oaxaca, National Science Board Member and Vice
Chairman, Coronado Communications Corporation
Awardee:  Spelman College


Spelman, a private liberal arts college, was founded in 1881 in
Atlanta as the first U.S. college primarily for black women. The
college's diverse student body is composed of 2,000 women
representing 42 states and 20 countries. Spelman's success in
producing leaders is quite evident in the sciences. Close to 40
percent of Spelman students major in science, mathematics, or a
dual-degree program in engineering, and 30 percent graduate
annually in these fields. In 1994, 121 of the 407 graduates earned
degrees in science and related fields.

Spelman College is ranked second for the number of African American
baccalaureate degrees awarded in mathematics, fifth among all U.S.
institutions in the number of African Americans admitted to medical
school, and is one of only two historically black institutions
ranked by the Carnegie Foundation as Baccalaureate I institutions,
based on the competitive admissions process and the number of
undergraduate degrees conferred. Last year Spelman established the
Center for Scientific Applications of Mathematics to strengthen
faculty and student research, contribute to the science and
mathematics education of local high school students, expand the
body of knowledge on undergraduate education in mathematics, and
promote the development of interdisciplinary curricula. With a 45
percent increase in the number of science majors pursuing Ph.D.
degrees, Spelman is poised to continue to address the challenge of
the participation of African American women in science and
technology fields.

--Jaime Oaxaca



INSTITUTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor: NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Jaime Oaxaca, National Science Board Member and Vice
Chairman, Coronado Communications Corporation
Awardee:  Maricopa County Community College District


The Maricopa County Community College District has carved out an
important niche in higher education in Arizona and the United
States. Ten colleges make up the Nation's second-largest
multicollege community college district. This is the State's single
largest provider of higher education.

The Maricopa County Community Colleges share a common vision: to
strive to exceed the changing expectations of their many
communities for effective, student-centered, flexible, and lifelong
educational opportunities. Faculty and staff are committed to the
principles of diversity. This institution is known for its emphasis
on teaching and learning. Nearly 170,000 students attend the
colleges each year.

Maricopa serves a large minority population--26.1 percent. More
than 11.5 percent of its students are Hispanic, almost 4 percent
are African American, 2.6 percent are American Indian and 8% are
other minority groups.

Inherent in the district's mission is providing service to minority
students who attend the area's elementary and secondary schools.
That service and attention include programs such as the
NSF-sponsored Comprehensive Regional Centers for Minorities (CRCM),
the American Indian Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (AIMES)
program, the Urban Systemic Initiative, and additional programs
such as Achieving a College Education (ACE), which enables minority
students to begin college studies as high school juniors. Another
program, Seamless Web, is designed to carry minority students
through graduate school.

The Maricopa County Community College District plays a leading role
in the Phoenix Think Tank--an umbrella organization dedicated to
the success of all students in an education pipeline that extends
from kindergarten through high school to the Maricopa County
Community Colleges and on to Arizona State University.

The Maricopa County Community College District enjoys a strong
relationship with Arizona State University. The two institutions
work hand in hand to ensure a solid articulation process, with
special emphasis on increasing the achievement of minority
students, in science, engineering and mathematics.

For its leadership and dedication to improving the quality of
learning in science and mathematics for all students, and for its
notable efforts for minorities at the precollege level through the
CRCM project, this NSF Institutional Award is presented to the
Maricopa County Community College District.

--Jaime Oaxaca



LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor: NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Luther S. Williams, Assistant Director, EHR
Awardee: Warren E. Henry
Professor Emeritus and Research and Seminar Director, Minority
Access to Research Careers, Howard University


This award was initiated at the first Diversity Conference and its
purpose is to honor individuals who, over a sustained period, have
exemplified the very finest in their individual careers and have
had a major mentorship role. The idea is, most assuredly, to honor
these individuals for lifetime achievement, but it also develops a
pool of senior individuals with respect to stature, not age, who
can participate in NSF's programming.

Warren Henry earned a bachelor's degree in mathematics at the
Tuskegee Institute (now University); a master's degree in organic
chemistry from Atlanta University (now Clark Atlanta); and a Ph.D.
in physical chemistry and physics at the University of Chicago. He
did postdoctoral work in mathematics at MIT and in physics at the
Catholic University of America and the University of Maryland. His
academic predoctoral and postdoctoral training included periods of
study and research with three Nobel laureates: James Franks,
Wolfgang Pauley, and A. H. Compton.

His distinguished academic career has covered more than 50 years,
and I'll only highlight a few points here. He has taught at every
academic level. He was a high school physics teacher and principal
of a small school in Alabama. He served on the faculties of Spelman
College, Morehouse College, and Tuskegee University, where he
taught physics and chemistry. His research career which has been
quite distinguished and of long duration, includes work at the MIT
Radiation Laboratory, the University of Chicago Institute for the
Study of Metals, the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, and Lockheed,
where he rose to the position of senior staff scientist.

He is involved in several seminal inventions, one of which is the
metal dewar used for liquid helium, which makes it possible to
study magnetic properties of substances in high magnetic fields at
exceedingly low temperatures. Another major discovery involves a
fiber optic subsystem, which has made it possible to rescue
disabled submarines from deep waters.

An individual of such distinction is listed in all the obvious
places, and I'll cite only a few: American Men and Women of Science
and Who's Who in America; Fellow of the American Physical Society
and the American Association for the Advancement of Science; member
of the Washington and New York Academies of Science; member of
Sigma Xi and the American Association of Physics Teachers. Dr.
Henry has to his credit more than 100 publications; the majority of
these papers were published before the peak of the civil rights
era, the significance of which is self-evident.

He has received a host of other awards, including the Alumni Award
from Tuskegee, the Outstanding Black Physicist Award, the Living
Legacy Award of the National Technical Association, and honorary
doctoral degrees from Clark Atlanta and Lehigh University.

In 1969, in the second chapter of his career, he joined the physics
department of Howard University and has been involved primarily in
graduate education and teaching. It is estimated that half of the
approximately 80 African Americans with Ph.D.'s in physics were
taught, at least in one course, by Warren Henry. This is an
individual unit of distinction, although I'm sure Dr. Henry would
agree that the number itself is a national tragedy.

He became a professor emeritus, because universities do that, but
he ignored the emeritus status and continued to teach for almost 10
years. He is now involved in leading the Minority Access to
Research Careers program that many of you know at Howard
University.

Warren, in acknowledgement of your many achievements over a long
period of time and your major role in mentoring, NSF is pleased to
present to you this Lifetime Achievement Award.

--Luther Williams



Warren Henry
It's a great pleasure to be here, and I just want to say to the
young students here--and to the old students, too--that it's
worthwhile to pursue your goals and develop your undenied talents.
I'm thinking of the poem "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard" by
Sir Thomas Gray. It says,

     Full many a gem of purest ray serene,
     The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear:
     Full many a flower born to blush unseen,
     and waste its sweetness on the desert air.
     We want to make sure that you develop your talents so that
     they will not be wasted.

 Thank you.



LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
Sponsor:  NSF, Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Presenter:  Luther S. Williams, Assistant Director, EHR
Awardee: Fred Begay
Staff Assistant to the Director, Office of Science and Technology,
Los Alamos National Laboratory


Dr. Fred Begay, an experimental physicist at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory, received a B.S. in physics and mathematics, an
M.S. in physics, and a Ph.D. in nuclear physics at the University
of New Mexico in Albuquerque. During his illustrious career, he has
participated in high-energy gamma ray physics and neutron physics
research, as well as solar wind and exploding wire research, and he
has investigated fundamental theoretical and experimental plasma
physics problems.


Dr. Begay was born on the Ute Mountain Indian Reservation in
Towaoc, Colorado. Because the Navajo language is not written, Dr.
Begay's name is an Americanized extraction from his native Ute
language.

In 1979, Dr. Begay was the subject of a television documentary for
NOVA entitled "The Long Walk of Fred Young." In this 1979
production, he explained that "A scientist looks at the world like
a child--always wondering what it is made of. What are the pieces?"
For more than 25 years, Dr. Begay has devoted his time and energy
to understanding fundamental plasma physics problems. His research
seeks to demonstrate technically the use of nuclear fusion as a
practical, economical alternative source of electrical power with
fewer health, environmental, and safety risks.

Beyond his stellar research efforts, he has made substantive
contributions to young people interested in science, mathematics,
and technology education through his service as president of the
Navajo Science and Research Council, a member of the National
Research Council, a member of the New Mexico Steering Committee for
the White House Conference on Indian Education, and a member of the
Committee on Minorities in Physics of the American Physical
Society. He currently has dropped any pretense of retirement and is
serving as project co-director of the Alliances for Minority
Participation Program at Arizona State University.

Dr. Begay, it is a great pleasure for me to present to you the
National Science Foundation's 1994 Lifetime Achievement Award. Your
dedication to increasing the base of knowledge of physics and your
involvement in increasing the presence of minorities in science and
engineering have made a lasting impact on the education and
research horizon.

--Luther Williams


Fred Begay
Maybe I should speak in Navajo. It is indeed an honor for me to
receive this award this year. I am deeply honored, and on behalf of
my wife, Helen (we've been married 40 years and have 7 children and
17 grandchildren)--on behalf of my family, I accept this award.
I, too, am proud to be a member of this meeting, and I, too, want
to recognize the youth here. Youth are very important for the
future.

I began learning English--formal English--at the age of 23, and I
studied physics and mathematics in German, so you see there were
many challenges that I had to meet and overcome.

You, also, will have many challenges, and I wish you all the best,
for those of you who have this dream of being a scientist. Maybe
you can join us at Los Alamos and do experiments!

Thank you very much.