59–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–85 

10,000 TEACHERS, 10 MILLION MINDS SCIENCE AND 

MATH SCHOLARSHIP ACT 

APRIL 16, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee, from the Committee on Science and 

Technology, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 362] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 362) to authorize science scholarships for educating mathematics and science teachers, and for other purposes, 

having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an 

amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Amendment ................................................................................................. 2 

II. Purpose ........................................................................................................ 11 

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 11 

IV. Hearing Summary ....................................................................................... 12 

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 13 

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 15 

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis ........................................................................ 15 

VIII. Committee Views ........................................................................................ 18 

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 22 

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 23 

XI. Compliance With Public Law 104–4 .......................................................... 26 

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 26 

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 26 

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 26 

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 26 

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 26 

XVII. Earmark Identification ............................................................................... 26 

XVIII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 26 

XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 27 

XX. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 40 

XXI. Correspondence ........................................................................................... 41 

XXII. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup ............................................. 43 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
2 

I. AMENDMENT

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

The table of contents for this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Findings. 

Sec. 3. Definitions. 

TITLE I—SCIENCE SCHOLARSHIPS 

Sec. 101. Short title. 

Sec. 102. Findings. 

Sec. 103. Policy objective. 

Sec. 104. Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program. 

TITLE II—MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT 

Sec. 201. Mathematics and science education partnerships amendments. 

Sec. 202. Teacher institutes. 

Sec. 203. Graduate degree program. 

Sec. 204. Curricular materials. 

Sec. 205. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program. 

Sec. 206. High-need local educational agency definition. 

Sec. 207. Teacher leaders. 

Sec. 208. Laboratory science pilot program. 

Sec. 209. Study on laboratory equipment donations for schools. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) The National Science Foundation has made significant and valuable contributions to the improvement of K–12 and undergraduate science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics education throughout its 56 year history. 

(2) Under section 3 of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 

1862), the National Science Foundation is explicitly required to strengthen 

science, mathematics, and engineering research potential and education programs at all levels. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) The term ‘‘cost of attendance’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll). 

(2) The term ‘‘Director’’ means the Director of the National Science Foundation. 

(3) The term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the meaning given that 

term in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)). 

(4) The term ‘‘mathematics and science teacher’’ means a mathematics, 

science, or technology teacher at the elementary school or secondary school 

level. 

TITLE I—SCIENCE SCHOLARSHIPS 

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and 

Math Scholarship Act’’. 

SEC. 102. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) The prosperity the United States enjoys today is due in no small part to 

investments the Nation has made in research and development over the past 

50 years. 

(2) Corporate, government, and national scientific and technical leaders have 

raised concerns that current trends affecting the science and technology enterprise of the Nation could result in erosion of this past success and jeopardize 

future prosperity. 

(3) The National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, 

and the Institute of Medicine were tasked in a congressional request to recommend actions that the Federal Government could take to enhance the science 

and technology enterprise so that the United States can successfully compete, 

prosper, and be secure in the global community of the 21st century. 

(4) The Academies’ highest priority recommendation in its report, ‘‘Rising 

Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
3 

Economic Future’’, is to improve K–12 mathematics and science education, and 

the Academies’ first recommended action item is to institute a major scholarship 

program to recruit and educate annually 10,000 mathematics and science teachers. 

SEC. 103. POLICY OBJECTIVE. 

In carrying out the program under section 104, the National Science Foundation 

shall seek to increase by up to 10,000 per year the number of elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers in the Nation’s schools having both exemplary subject knowledge and pedagogical skills. 

SEC. 104. ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. 

(a) PROGRAM AMENDMENTS.—Section 10 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n–1) is amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘teacher’’ after ‘‘noyce’’ in the section heading; 

(2) in subsection (a)(1)—

(A) by striking ‘‘to provide scholarships, stipends, and programming designed’’; 

(B) by inserting ‘‘and to provide scholarships and stipends to students 

participating in the program’’ after ‘‘science teachers’’; and 

(C) by inserting ‘‘Teacher’’ after ‘‘Noyce’’; 

(3) in subsection (a)(3)(A)—

(A) by striking ‘‘encourage top college juniors and seniors’’ and inserting 

‘‘recruit and prepare undergraduate students’’; and 

(B) by inserting ‘‘qualified as’’ after ‘‘to become’’; 

(4) in subsection (a)(3)(A)(ii)—

(A) by striking ‘‘programs to help scholarship recipients’’ and inserting 

‘‘academic courses and early field teaching experiences designed to prepare 

students participating in the program’’; 

(B) by striking ‘‘programs that will result in’’ and inserting ‘‘such preparation as is necessary to meet requirements for’’; and 

(C) by striking ‘‘licensing; and’’ and inserting ‘‘licensing;’’; 

(5) in subsection (a)(3)(A)(iii)—

(A) by striking ‘‘scholarship recipients’’ and inserting ‘‘students participating in the program’’; 

(B) by striking ‘‘enable the recipients’’ and inserting ‘‘enable the students’’; and 

(C) by striking ‘‘; or’’ and inserting ‘‘; and’’; 

(6) in subsection (a)(3)(A) by inserting at the end the following new clause: 

‘‘(iv) providing summer internships for freshman students participating in the program; or’’; 

(7) in subsection (a)(3)(B)—

(A) by striking ‘‘encourage’’ and inserting ‘‘recruit and prepare’’; and 

(B) by inserting ‘‘qualified as’’ after ‘‘to become’’; 

(8) by amending clause (ii) of subsection (a)(3)(B) to read as follows: 

‘‘(ii) offering academic courses and field teaching experiences designed to prepare stipend recipients to teach in elementary schools and 

secondary schools, including such preparation as is necessary to meet 

requirements for teacher certification or licensing; and’’; 

(9) in subsection (a) by inserting at the end the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(4) ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT.—To be eligible for an award under this section, an institution of higher education (or consortia of such institutions) shall 

ensure that specific faculty members and staff from the institution’s mathematics, science, or engineering departments and specific education faculty are 

designated to carry out the development and implementation of the program. 

An institution of higher education may also include teacher leaders to participate in developing the pedagogical content of the program and to supervise students participating in the program in their field teaching experiences. No institution of higher education shall be eligible for an award unless faculty from the 

institution’s mathematics, science, or engineering departments are active participants in the program.’’; 

(10) in subsection (b)(1)(A)—

(A) by striking ‘‘scholarship or stipend’’; 

(B) by inserting ‘‘and summer internships’’ after ‘‘number of scholarships’’; and 

(C) by inserting ‘‘the type of activities proposed for the recruitment of students to the program,’’ after ‘‘intends to award,’’; 

(11) in subsection (b)(1)(B)—

(A) by striking ‘‘scholarship or stipend’’; and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
4 

(B) by striking ‘‘; and’’ and inserting ‘‘, which may include a description 

of any existing programs at the applicant’s institution that are targeted to 

the education of mathematics and science teachers and the number of 

teachers graduated annually from such programs;’’; 

(12) in subsection (b)(1), by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the following: ‘‘(C) a description of the academic courses and field teaching experiences 

required under subsection (a)(3)(A)(ii) and (B)(ii), including— ‘‘(i) a description of the undergraduate program that will enable a 

student to graduate within 5 years with a major in mathematics, 

science, or engineering and to obtain teacher certification or licensing; ‘‘(ii) a description of the field teaching experiences proposed; and 

‘‘(iii) evidence of agreements between the applicant and the schools 

or school districts that are identified as the locations at which field 

teaching experiences will occur; ‘‘(D) a description of the programs required under subsection (a)(3)(A)(iii) 

and (B)(iii), including activities to assist new teachers in fulfilling their 

service requirements under this section; and ‘‘(E) an identification of the applicant’s mathematics, science, or engineering faculty and its education faculty who will carry out the development 

and implementation of the program as required under subsection (a)(4).’’; 

(13) in subsection (b)(2)—

(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and (E) as subparagraphs (C), (D), (E) and (F), respectively; 

(B) by inserting after subparagraph (A) a new subparagraph as follows: 

‘‘(B) the extent to which the applicant’s mathematics, science, or engineering faculty and its education faculty have worked or will work collaboratively to design new or revised curricula that recognizes the specialized 

pedagogy required to teach mathematics, science, and technology effectively 

in elementary and secondary schools;’’; and 

(C) by amending subparagraph (F), as so redesignated by subparagraph 

(A) of this paragraph, to read as follows: 

‘‘(F) the ability of the applicant to recruit students who are individuals 

identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b).’’; 

(14) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking ‘‘2 years’’ and inserting ‘‘3 years’’; 

(15) in subsection (c)(3)—

(A) by striking ‘‘$7,500’’ and inserting ‘‘$10,000’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘2 years of scholarship support’’ and inserting ‘‘3 years of 

scholarship support, unless the Director establishes a policy by which parttime students may receive additional years of support’’; 

(16) in subsection (c)(4)—

(A) by striking ‘‘6 years’’ and inserting ‘‘8 years’’; 

(B) by inserting ‘‘, with a maximum service requirement of 6 years’’ after 

‘‘was received’’; and 

(C) by striking ‘‘Service required under this paragraph shall be performed 

in a high-need local educational agency.’’; 

(17) in subsection (c), by adding at the end a new paragraph as follows: 

‘‘(5) EXCEPTION.—The period of service obligation under paragraph (4) is reduced by 1 year for scholarship recipients whose service is performed in a highneed local educational agency.’’; 

(18) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ‘‘to receive certification or licensing to 

teach’’ and inserting ‘‘established under subsection (a)(3)(B)’’; 

(19) in subsection (d)(2), by inserting ‘‘and professional achievement’’ after 

‘‘academic merit’’; 

(20) in subsection (d)(3), by striking ‘‘1 year’’ and inserting ‘‘16 months’’; 

(21) in subsection (d)(4)—

(A) by striking ‘‘6 years’’ and inserting ‘‘4 years’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘for each year a stipend was received’’; 

(22) in subsection (g)(2)(A)—

(A) by striking ‘‘Treasurer of the United States,’’ and inserting ‘‘Treasurer 

of the United States.’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘multiplied by 2.’’; 

(23) in subsection (i)(3), by inserting ‘‘or had a career in’’ after ‘‘is working 

in’’; 

(24) in subsection (i)—

(A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (4); 

(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and inserting ‘‘; 

and’’; and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
5 

(C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(6) the term ‘teacher leader’ means a mathematics or science teacher who 

works to improve the instruction of mathematics or science in kindergarten 

through grade 12 through— ‘‘(A) participating in the development or revision of science, mathematics, 

engineering, or technology curricula; ‘‘(B) serving as a mentor to mathematics or science teachers; 

‘‘(C) coordinating and assisting teachers in the use of hands-on inquiry 

materials, equipment, and supplies, and when appropriate, supervising acquisition and repair of such materials; ‘‘(D) providing in-classroom teaching assistance to mathematics or science 

teachers; and ‘‘(E) providing professional development, for the purposes of training 

other teacher leaders, to mathematics and science teachers.’’; and 

(25) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(j) MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE SCHOLARSHIP GIFT FUND.—In accordance with 

section 11(f) of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, the Director is authorized to accept donations from the private sector to support scholarships, stipends, 

or internships associated with programs under this section. ‘‘(k) ASSESSMENT OF TEACHER SERVICE AND RETENTION.—Not later than 4 years 

after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Director shall transmit to Congress a report on the effectiveness of the program carried out under this section. 

The report shall include the proportion of individuals receiving scholarships or stipends under the program who —

‘‘(1) fulfill their service obligation required under this section in a high-need 

local educational agency; 

‘‘(2) elect to fulfill their service obligation in a high-need local educational 

agency but fail to complete it, as defined in subsection (g); 

‘‘(3) remain in the teaching profession beyond their service obligation; and 

‘‘(4) remain in the teaching profession in a high-need local educational agency 

beyond their service obligation. 

‘‘(l) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the Director for the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program—

‘‘(1) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

‘‘(2) $101,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

‘‘(3) $133,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; 

‘‘(4) $164,000,000 for fiscal year 2011; and 

‘‘(5) $196,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 8(6) of the National Science Foundation 

Authorization Act of 2002 is amended—

(1) in the paragraph heading by inserting ‘‘TEACHER’’ after ‘‘NOYCE’’; and 

(2) by inserting ‘‘Teacher’’ after ‘‘Noyce’’. 

TITLE II—MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE 

EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT 

SEC. 201. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS AMENDMENTS. 

Section 9 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 

1862n) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)(2)—

(A) by striking ‘‘(A)’’; 

(B) by striking subparagraph (B); 

(C) by inserting ‘‘, through 1 or more of its departments in science, mathematics, or engineering,’’ after ‘‘institution of higher education’’; and 

(D) by striking ‘‘a State educational agency’’ and inserting ‘‘education faculty from the participating institution or institutions of higher education, 

a State educational agency,’’; 

(2) in subsection (a)(3)(B)—

(A) by inserting ‘‘content-specific’’ before ‘‘professional development programs’’; 

(B) by inserting ‘‘which are’’ before ‘‘designed’’; and 

(C) by inserting ‘‘and which may include teacher training activities to prepare mathematics and science teachers to teach challenging mathematics, 

science, and technology college-preparatory courses, including Advanced 

Placement and International Baccalaureate courses’’ after ‘‘and science 

teachers’’; 

(3) in subsection (a)(3)(C)—


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
6 

(A) by inserting ‘‘and laboratory experiences’’ after ‘‘technology’’; and 

(B) by inserting ‘‘and laboratory’’ after ‘‘provide technical’’; 

(4) in subsection (a)(3)(I) by inserting ‘‘including model induction programs for 

teachers in their first 2 years of teaching,’’ after ‘‘and science,’’; 

(5) in subsection (a)(3)(K) by striking ‘‘developing and offering mathematics 

or science enrichment programs for students, including after-school and summer 

programs;’’ and inserting ‘‘developing educational programs and materials and 

conducting mathematics, science, and technology enrichment programs for students, including after-school programs and summer camps for students described in subsection (b)(2)(G);’’; 

(6) in subsection (a) by inserting at the end the following: 

‘‘(8) MASTER’S DEGREE PROGRAMS.—Activities carried out in accordance with 

paragraph (3)(B) shall include the development and offering of master’s degree 

programs for in-service mathematics and science teachers that will strengthen 

their subject area knowledge and pedagogical skills, as described in section 203 

of the Act enacting this paragraph. Grants provided under this section may be 

used to develop and implement courses of instruction for the master’s degree 

programs, which may involve online learning, and develop related educational 

materials. 

‘‘(9) MENTORS FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS OF CHALLENGING COURSES.—Partnerships carrying out activities to prepare mathematics and science teachers to 

teach challenging mathematics, science, and technology college-preparatory 

courses, including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 

courses, in accordance with paragraph (3)(B) shall encourage companies employing scientists, mathematicians, or engineers to provide mentors to teachers and 

students and provide for the coordination of such mentoring activities. 

‘‘(10) INVENTIVENESS.—Activities carried out in accordance with paragraph 

(3)(H) may include the development and dissemination of curriculum tools that 

will help foster inventiveness and innovation.’’; 

(7) in subsection (b)(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as subparagraphs (F) and (G), respectively, and inserting after subparagraph (D) the 

following new subparagraph: 

‘‘(E) the extent to which the evaluation described in paragraph (1)(E) will 

be independent and based on objective measures;’’; 

(8) in subsection (b) by inserting at the end the following: 

‘‘(4) MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM GRANT SIZE.—A grant awarded under this section 

shall be not less than $75,000 or greater than $2,000,000 for any fiscal year.’’; 

(9) in subsection (c)—

(A) by striking paragraph (2); 

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) as paragraphs (4), (5), 

and (6), respectively; and 

(C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new paragraphs: 

‘‘(2) REPORT ON MODEL PROJECTS.—The Director shall determine which completed projects funded through the program under this section should be seen 

as models to be replicated on a more expansive basis at the State or national 

levels. Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the 

Director shall transmit a report describing the results of this study to the Committee on Science and Technology and the Committee on Education and Labor 

of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate. 

‘‘(3) REPORT ON EVALUATIONS.—Not later than 4 years after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Director shall transmit a report summarizing the 

evaluations required under subsection (b)(1)(E) of grants received under this 

program and describing any changes to the program recommended as a result 

of these evaluations to the Committee on Science and Technology and the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate. Such report shall be 

made widely available to the public.’’; and 

(10) by adding at the end the following new subsection: 

‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section—

‘‘(1) the term ‘mathematics and science teacher’ means a mathematics, 

science, or technology teacher at the elementary school or secondary school 

level; and 

‘‘(2) the term ‘science’, in the context of elementary and secondary education, 

includes technology and pre-engineering.’’. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
7 

SEC. 202. TEACHER INSTITUTES. 

(a) NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION INSTITUTES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall establish a grant program to provide for 

summer or academic year teacher institutes or workshops authorized by section 

9(a)(3)(B) of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 

U.S.C. 1862n(a)(3)(B)) and shall allow grantees under the Teacher Institutes for 

the 21st Century program to operate 1 to 2 week summer teacher institutes 

with the goal of reaching the maximum number of in-service mathematics and 

science teachers, particularly elementary and middle school teachers, to improve 

their content knowledge and pedagogical skills. 

(2) PREPARATION TO TEACH CHALLENGING COURSES.—The Director shall ensure that activities supported for awards under paragraph (1) include the development and implementation of teacher training activities to prepare mathematics and science teachers to teach challenging mathematics, science, and 

technology college-preparatory courses, including Advanced Placement and 

International Baccalaureate courses. 

(3) AWARDS.—In awarding grants under this section, the Director shall give 

priority to applications that propose programs that will attract mathematics 

and science teachers from local educational agencies that—

(A) are receiving grants under title I of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq) as a result of having within 

their jurisdictions concentrations of children from low income families; and 

(B) are experiencing a shortage of highly qualified teachers, as defined in 

section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

U.S.C. 7801), in the fields of science, mathematics, or technology. 

(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation for the purposes of this section, 

$32,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, $35,200,000 for fiscal year 2009, $38,700,000 

for fiscal year 2010, $42,600,000 for fiscal year 2011, and $46,800,000 for fiscal 

year 2012. 

(b) LABORATORY SCIENCE TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy for the Laboratory Science 

Teacher Professional Development program, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, 

$8,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, and $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2012. 

SEC. 203. GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall ensure that master’s degree programs for inservice mathematics and science teachers that will strengthen their subject area 

knowledge and pedagogical skills are instituted in accordance with section 9(a)(8) 

of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 

1862n(a)(8)). The degree programs shall be designed for current teachers, who will 

enroll as part-time students, and to allow participants to obtain master’s degrees 

within a period of 3 years. 

(b) DISTRIBUTION OF AWARDS.—The Director shall, in awarding grants to carry out 

subsection (a), consider the distribution of awards among institutions of higher education of different sizes and geographic locations. 

(c) PROGRAM ACTIVITIES.—Activities supported through master’s degree programs 

established under subsection (a) may include—

(1) development of courses of instruction and related educational materials; 

(2) stipends to defray the cost of attendance for students in the degree program; and 

(3) acquisition of computer and networking equipment needed for online instruction under the degree program. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the National Science Foundation for the purposes of this section $46,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2008, $50,600,000 for fiscal year 2009, $55,700,000 for fiscal year 2010, 

$61,200,000 for fiscal year 2011, and $67,300,000 for fiscal year 2012. 

SEC. 204. CURRICULAR MATERIALS. 

The Director, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall convene a national panel of experts on mathematics and science education to identify and collect 

K–12 mathematics, science, and technology teaching materials that have been demonstrated to be effective and to recommend the development of new materials in 

areas where effective materials do not exist. The Director and Secretary shall develop ways to disseminate effective materials and support efforts to develop new 

materials, in accordance with the recommendations of the national panel. Recommendations made under this section shall not be considered a mandate of specific 

K–12 curricula. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
8 

SEC. 205. SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS TALENT EXPANSION 

PROGRAM. 

(a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 8(7) of the National Science Foundation Authorization 

Act of 2002 is amended— (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘competitive, merit-based’’ and all that follows through ‘‘in recent years.’’ and inserting ‘‘competitive, merit-reviewed 

multiyear grants for eligible applicants to improve undergraduate education in 

science, mathematics, engineering, and technology through— ‘‘(i) the creation of programs to increase the number of students studying 

toward and completing associate’s or bachelor’s degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, particularly in fields that have faced 

declining enrollment in recent years; and 

‘‘(ii) the creation of centers (in this paragraph referred to as ‘Centers’) to 

develop undergraduate curriculum, teaching methods for undergraduate 

courses, and methods to better train professors and teaching assistants who 

teach undergraduate courses to increase the number of students completing 

undergraduate courses in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, including the number of nonmajors, and to improve student academic achievement in those courses. 

Grants made under clause (ii) shall be awarded jointly through the Education 

and Human Resources Directorate and at least 1 research directorate of the 

Foundation.’’; 

(2) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows: 

‘‘(B) In selecting projects under subparagraph (A)(i), the Director shall strive 

to increase the number of students studying toward and completing baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, or certificates in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology who are—

‘‘(i) individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b); or 

‘‘(ii) graduates of a secondary school that is administered by a local educational agency that is receiving grants under title I of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq) as a result of having within its jurisdiction concentrations of children from low income families.’’; 

(3) in subparagraph (C)—

(A) by inserting ‘‘(i)’’ before ‘‘The types of’’; 

(B) by redesignating clauses (i) through (vi) as subclauses (I) through 

(VI), respectively; 

(C) by striking ‘‘under this paragraph’’ and inserting ‘‘under subparagraph (A)(i)’’; and 

(D) by adding at the end the following new clause: 

‘‘(ii) The types of activities the Foundation may support under subparagraph 

(A)(ii) include—

‘‘(I) creating model curricula and laboratory programs; 

‘‘(II) developing and demonstrating research-based instructional methods 

and technologies; 

‘‘(III) developing methods to train graduate students and faculty to be 

more effective teachers of undergraduates; 

‘‘(IV) conducting programs to disseminate curricula, instructional methods, or training methods to faculty at the grantee institutions and at other 

institutions; 

‘‘(V) conducting assessments of the effectiveness of the Center at accomplishing the goals described in subparagraph (A)(ii); and 

‘‘(VI) conducting any other activities the Director determines will accomplish the goals described in subparagraph (A)(ii).’’; 

(4) in subparagraph (D)(i), by striking ‘‘under this paragraph’’ and inserting 

‘‘under subparagraph (A)(i)’’; 

(5) in subparagraph (D)(ii), by striking ‘‘under this paragraph’’ and inserting 

‘‘under subparagraph (A)(i)’’; 

(6) after subparagraph (D)(iii), by adding at the end the following new clause: 

‘‘(iv) A grant under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be awarded for 5 years, and the 

Director may extend such a grant for up to 2 additional 3 year periods.’’; 

(7) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘under this paragraph’’ both places it appears and inserting ‘‘under subparagraph (A)(i)’’; 

(8) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (J); and 

(9) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following new subparagraphs: 

‘‘(F) Grants awarded under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be carried out by a department or departments of science, mathematics, or engineering at institutions 

of higher education (or a consortia thereof), which may partner with education 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
9 

faculty. Applications for awards under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be submitted 

to the Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such information 

as the Director may require. At a minimum, the application shall include—

‘‘(i) a description of the activities to be carried out by the Center; 

‘‘(ii) a plan for disseminating programs related to the activities carried 

out by the Center to faculty at the grantee institution and at other institutions; 

‘‘(iii) an estimate of the number of faculty, graduate students (if any), and 

undergraduate students who will be affected by the activities carried out by 

the Center; and 

‘‘(iv) a plan for assessing the effectiveness of the Center at accomplishing 

the goals described in subparagraph (A)(ii). 

‘‘(G) In evaluating the applications submitted under subparagraph (F), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

‘‘(i) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the proposed activities, including the dissemination activities described in subparagraph 

(C)(ii)(IV); and 

‘‘(ii) the extent to which the faculty, staff, and administrators of the applicant institution are committed to improving undergraduate science, mathematics, and engineering education. 

‘‘(H) In awarding grants under subparagraph (A)(ii), the Director shall endeavor to ensure that a wide variety of science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics fields and types of institutions of higher education, including 2- 

year colleges and minority-serving institutions, are covered, and that—

‘‘(i) at least 1 Center is housed at a Doctoral/Research University as defined by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; and 

‘‘(ii) at least 1 Center is focused on improving undergraduate education 

in an interdisciplinary area. 

‘‘(I) The Director shall convene an annual meeting of the awardees under this 

paragraph to foster collaboration and to disseminate the results of the Centers 

and the other activities funded under this paragraph.’’. 

(b) REPORT ON DATA COLLECTION.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to Congress a report on how the 

Director is determining whether current grant recipients in the Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program are making satisfactory 

progress as required by section 8(7)(D)(ii) of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 and what funding actions have been taken as a result of the 

Director’s determinations. 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the National Science Foundation for the program described in paragraph (7) of 

section 8 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002—

(1) $44,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, of which $4,000,000 shall be for the 

grants described in subparagraph (A)(ii) of that paragraph; 

(2) $55,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, of which $10,000,000 shall be for the 

grants described in subparagraph (A)(ii) of that paragraph; 

(3) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, of which $10,000,000 shall be for the 

grants described in subparagraph (A)(ii) of that paragraph; 

(4) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, of which $10,000,000 shall be for the 

grants described in subparagraph (A)(ii) of that paragraph; and 

(5) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2012, of which $10,000,000 shall be for the 

grants described in subparagraph (A)(ii) of that paragraph. 

SEC. 206. HIGH-NEED LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY DEFINITION. 

Section 4(8) of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 

U.S.C. 1862n note) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(8) HIGH-NEED LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.—The term ‘high-need local educational agency’ means a local educational agency that—

‘‘(A) is receiving grants under title I of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq) as a result of having within 

its jurisdiction concentrations of children from low income families; and 

‘‘(B) is experiencing a shortage of highly qualified teachers, as defined in 

section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

U.S.C. 7801), in the fields of science, mathematics, or engineering.’’. 

SEC. 207. TEACHER LEADERS. 

The National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 is amended—

(1) in section 4(11)—

(A) by striking ‘‘MASTER TEACHER’’ and inserting ‘‘TEACHER LEADER’’; 

(B) by striking ‘‘master teacher’’ and inserting ‘‘teacher leader’’; and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
10 

(C) in subparagraph (E), by striking ‘‘master teachers’’ and inserting 

‘‘teacher leaders’’; and 

(2) in section 9—

(A) in subsection (a)(3)(E), by striking ‘‘master teachers’’ and inserting 

‘‘teacher leaders’’; and 

(B) in subsection (a)(4)—

(i) by striking ‘‘MASTER TEACHERS’’ and inserting ‘‘TEACHER LEADERS’’; 

and 

(ii) by striking ‘‘master teachers’’ each place it appears and inserting 

‘‘teacher leaders’’. 

SEC. 208. LABORATORY SCIENCE PILOT PROGRAM. 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 

(1) To remain competitive in science and technology in the global economy, 

the United States must increase the number of students graduating from high 

school prepared to pursue postsecondary education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. 

(2) There is broad agreement in the scientific community that learning science 

requires direct involvement by students in scientific inquiry and that laboratory 

experience is so integral to the nature of science that it must be included in 

every science program for every science student. 

(3) In America’s Lab Report, the National Research Council concluded that 

the current quality of laboratory experiences is poor for most students and that 

educators and researchers do not agree on how to define high school science laboratories or on their purpose, hampering the accumulation of research on how 

to improve labs. 

(4) The National Research Council found that schools with higher concentrations of non-Asian minorities and schools with higher concentrations of poor 

students are less likely to have adequate laboratory facilities than other schools. 

(5) The Government Accountability Office reported that 49.1 percent of 

schools where the minority student population is greater than 50.5 percent reported not meeting functional requirements for laboratory science well or at all. 

(6) 40 percent of those college students who left the science fields reported 

some problems related to high school science preparation, including lack of laboratory experience and no introduction to theoretical or to analytical modes of 

thought. 

(7) It is in the national interest for the Federal Government to invest in research and demonstration projects to improve the teaching of laboratory science 

in the Nation’s high schools. 

(b) GRANT PROGRAM.—Section 8(8) of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 is amended—

(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (F) as clauses (i) through (vi), 

respectively; 

(2) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ before ‘‘A program of competitive’’; and 

(3) by inserting at the end the following new subparagraphs: 

‘‘(B) In accordance with subparagraph (A)(v), the Director shall establish a research pilot program designated as ‘Partnerships for Access to Laboratory 

Science’ to award grants to partnerships to improve laboratories and provide instrumentation as part of a comprehensive program to enhance the quality of 

mathematics, science, engineering, and technology instruction at the secondary 

school level. Grants under this subparagraph may be used for—

‘‘(i) purchase, rental, or leasing of equipment, instrumentation, and other 

scientific educational materials; 

‘‘(ii) maintenance, renovation, and improvement of laboratory facilities; 

‘‘(iii) development of instructional programs designed to integrate the laboratory experience with classroom instruction and to be consistent with 

State mathematics and science academic achievement standards; 

‘‘(iv) training in laboratory safety for school personnel; 

‘‘(v) design and implementation of hands-on laboratory experiences to encourage the interest of individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the 

Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 

1885b) in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology and help prepare such individuals to pursue postsecondary studies in these fields; and 

‘‘(vi) assessment of the activities funded under this subparagraph. 

‘‘(C) Grants may be made under subparagraph (B) only to a partnership—

‘‘(i) for a project that includes significant teacher training and professional development components; or 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
11 

‘‘(ii) that establishes that appropriate teacher training and professional 

development is being addressed, or has been addressed, through other 

means. ‘‘(D) Grants awarded under subparagraph (B) shall be to a partnership that— ‘‘(i) includes an institution of higher education or a community college; 

‘‘(ii) includes a high-need local educational agency; 

‘‘(iii) includes a business or eligible nonprofit organization; and 

‘‘(iv) may include a State educational agency, other public agency, National Laboratory, or community-based organization. ‘‘(E) The Federal share of the cost of activities carried out using amounts from 

a grant under subparagraph (B) shall not exceed 50 percent. ‘‘(F) The Director shall require grant recipients to submit a report to the Director on the results of the project supported by the grant.’’. (c) REPORT.—The Director shall evaluate the effectiveness of activities carried out 

under the research pilot projects funded by the grant program established pursuant 

to the amendment made by subsection (b) in improving student performance in 

mathematics, science, engineering, and technology. A report documenting the results of that evaluation shall be submitted to the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committees on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation and on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate 

not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act. The report shall identify best practices and materials developed and demonstrated by grant awardees. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated 

to the National Science Foundation to carry out this section and the amendments 

made by this section $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 3 succeeding fiscal years. 

SEC. 209. STUDY ON LABORATORY EQUIPMENT DONATIONS FOR SCHOOLS. 

Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall 

transmit a report to the Congress examining the extent to which institutions of 

higher education are donating used laboratory equipment to elementary and secondary schools. The Director, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall 

survey institutions of higher education to determine— (1) how often, how much, and what type of equipment is donated; 

(2) what criteria or guidelines the institutions are using to determine what 

types of equipment can be donated, what condition the equipment should be in, 

and which schools receive the equipment; 

(3) whether the institutions provide any support to, or follow-up with the 

schools; and 

(4) how appropriate donations can be encouraged. 

II. PURPOSE

The purpose of the bill is to improve K–12 mathematics, science, 

and technology education through recruitment, training, mentoring, and professional development of teachers, to improve laboratory experiences in secondary schools, and to increase the number of undergraduates entering science, technology, engineering, 

and mathematics (STEM) fields. 

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

In 1995, the first Trends in International Math and Science 

Study (TIMSS) reported alarming data regarding American student 

achievement in mathematics and science. 

American twelfth-graders ranked behind comparable students 

from 17 other countries out of 21 countries in the study. Of the 16 

of those countries that participated in an analysis of achievement 

in physics, the United States ranked last. Follow-up TIMSS studies 

and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) studies have confirmed that American students are behind their peers 

from many other industrialized nations. For example, in the comprehensive 2003 PISA study, the United States ranked 28th out of 

40 countries in mathematics achievement of 15-year-old students. 

Several recent reports have concluded that improving the math and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
12 

science achievement of American students is critical to the vision 

of a competitive America continuing to lead the world in technology 

and innovation. In particular, the National Academies 2007 report 

Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing 

America for a Brighter Economic Future (Gathering Storm) identifies the following as its highest priority policy recommendation: 

Increase America’s talent pool by vastly improving K–12 

science and mathematics education. 

Other reports echoing this same sentiment have come from the 

National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 

21st Century (the Glenn Commission), the Council on Competitiveness, the Association of American Universities (AAU), the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, AeA (formerly the American Electronics Association), the Business Roundtable, the Electronic Industries Alliance, the National Association 

of Manufacturers, and TechNet. 

Having a leading science and technology enterprise is not just a 

matter of national prestige. Science and technology is largely responsible for the innovation that drove the American economic 

dominance of the last half of the twentieth century and that led to 

high-paying jobs and a high standard of living. But the last decade 

or two has seen a narrowing of the U.S. lead in these areas, and 

the ‘‘gathering storm’’ in the title of the National Academies report 

is a reference to the decline of American technological leadership. 

High-tech jobs are moving off-shore, historic giants of American industry are in decline, and the U.S. has become a net importer of 

high-tech products. 

To rise above this gathering storm, the Academies report advocates for a major investment in the nation’s competitiveness. In addition to improving K–12 science and mathematics education, the 

report recommends investing in scientific and engineering research, 

recruiting and retaining the best scientists and engineers in the 

world, and improving the innovation climate for industry. 

The Gathering Storm report identifies specific action items to accomplish the general recommendations. Among them are to annually recruit 10,000 science and mathematics teachers by awarding 

scholarships, to strengthen the skills of 250,000 teachers through 

summer institutes and master’s degree programs, and to increase 

the number of U.S. citizens who earn bachelor’s degrees in STEM 

fields by providing 25,000 scholarships every year. The principal 

provisions of this Act work towards the implementation of these 

three action items. 

IV. HEARING SUMMARY

On Tuesday, March 13, 2007, the Committee on Science and 

Technology held a hearing on Science and Technology Leadership 

in a 21st Century Global Economy. The witnesses were Mr. Norman R. Augustine, retired Chairman and CEO of the Lockheed 

Martin Corporation and chair of the National Academies committee 

that wrote the Gathering Storm report; Mr. Harold McGraw III, 

Chairman and CEO of the McGraw-Hill Companies and Chair of 

the Business Roundtable; Dr. Robert Dynes, President of the University of California; Dr. Craig Barrett, Chairman of the Board of 

the Intel Corporation; Dr. Neal Lane, Professor of Physics at Rice 

University and former Director of the National Science Foundation; 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
13 

and Ms. Deborah Wince-Smith, President of the Council on Competitiveness. The witnesses were asked to explain why the promotion of science and technology is so critical to America’s prosperity. In particular, they were asked to address H.R. 362, H.R. 

363, and the connection between these bills and the recommendations of the Gathering Storm report. 

These witnesses represent a broad cross-section of academic, government, and business leadership. Their testimony emphasized 

how support of K–12 education in math and science is critical to 

developing the technical workforce that a competitive nation demands. They also emphasized how the entire science and technology enterprise supports innovation that is needed to produce 

high-paying jobs and a high standard of living. Members of the 

committee asked the panelists to comment on • why the emphasis within the education programs is on 

teachers; 

• how our economy can produce high-paying jobs; • the role of NSF in federal STEM education programs; • whether our culture needs changing to improve attitudes 

about education; 

• whether funds for physical science research should come 

from other disciplines; 

• what we need to do to make teaching a more attractive profession; and 

• how to entice industry into funding education programs. 

All the witnesses expressed their support for H.R. 362. 

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

On January 10, 2007, Rep. Bart Gordon and Rep. Ralph Hall, 

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Committee on 

Science and Technology, introduced H.R. 362, which includes the 

‘‘10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds Science and Math Scholarship 

Act’’. The purpose of the bill is to improve K–12 STEM education 

through recruitment, training, mentoring, and professional development of teachers. Many of the provisions in the bill are closely related to provisions in H.R. 5358, which was ordered reported by the 

Committee during the 109th Congress. 

The full Committee on Science and Technology met on Wednesday, March 28, 2007, to consider the bill. Mr. Gordon and Mr. Hall 

offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute that clarifies 

language in several places and that • inserts ‘‘technology’’ in all references to K–12 science and 

mathematics education; 

• allows Noyce Program scholarship recipients to complete 

their program within 5 years, rather than in 4 years; 

• for review of applications under the Noyce program, adds the 

requirement for NSF to consider the ability of the applicant to 

attract women and minority students; 

• revises Noyce program reporting requirements to track involvement of participants in high-need schools; 

• provides a single authorization of appropriations for each 

year of the Noyce program (removes floors and ceilings for ‘‘capacity building activities’’); • replaces references to Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses with ‘‘challenging math, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
14 

science, and technology college-preparatory courses, including 

AP and IB courses’’; • allows part-time master’s degree programs to cover 3 years, 

rather than being limited to 2 years; 

• redefines ‘‘high-need local education agency’’ to be one in 

which there is a concentration of children from low-income 

families and a shortage of highly qualified teachers; and 

• replaces the term ‘‘master teacher’’ with the term ‘‘teacher 

leader’’. By unanimous consent, the Committee agreed to treat this 

amendment in the nature of a substitute as original text for purposes of amendment. 

Ms. Johnson and Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to establish 

a pilot research program at NSF to fund partnerships between universities, businesses, and high-need schools for the purpose of determining how to improve laboratory science in secondary schools. 

Grants funded under this program: • must have a one-to-one cost sharing from non-federal 

sources; 

• must provide for teacher training and professional development in the effective use of laboratories; and 

• may be used for acquisition or maintenance of instrumentation and equipment and the development of instructional programs. 

The amendment was adopted by a voice vote. 

Ms. Johnson offered an amendment to specify that NSF, in attempting to provide STEM Talent Expansion Program (STEP) 

grants at a wide variety of types of institutions of higher education, 

include minority-serving institutions in these attempts. The 

amendment was adopted by a voice vote. 

Ms. Giffords offered an amendment to require that NSF attempt 

to increase the number of STEP grants that involve projects that 

are designed to attract students who have graduated from secondary schools having a concentration of students from low-income 

families. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote. 

Ms. Giffords offered an amendment to require NSF to give priority in awarding grants for teacher summer institutes under the 

Mathematics and Science Education Partnership program to 

projects that involve teachers from high-need school systems. The 

amendment was adopted by a voice vote. 

Mr. Akin offered an amendment to ensure that Section 204 not 

be considered as a mandate for use of specific STEM curricula. The 

amendment was adopted by a voice vote. 

There being no further amendments, the amendment in the nature of a substitute was adopted by a voice vote. 

With a quorum present, the bill was then unanimously approved 

by a voice vote. 

Rep. Ralph Hall, Ranking Minority Member of the Committee, 

moved that the Committee favorably report the bill, H.R. 362, as 

amended, to the House with the recommendation that the bill do 

pass, and that the staff be instructed to make technical and conforming changes to the bill and prepare the legislative report and 

that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill before 

the House for consideration. With a quorum present, the motion 

was agreed to by a voice vote. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
15 

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

This bill amends the National Science Foundation Authorization 

Act of 2002 by: 

• amending the Robert Noyce Scholarship program to improve STEM teacher education and provide scholarships for 

college students in STEM fields who commit to teaching after 

graduation. Scholarship students major in a STEM field, learn 

content-specific pedagogy, get early field experience, and receive mentoring and induction support; 

• amending the Mathematics and Science Education Partnership (MSP) program to provide for summer institutes and 

graduate programs that provide sustained, content-oriented 

professional development to teachers of math, science and technology; 

• amending the STEP program by establishing centers for 

improvement of undergraduate education in STEM fields; and 

• establishing a pilot program at NSF to build partnerships 

to improve laboratory science in secondary schools. 

The bill also: 

• establishes a national panel to collect model K–12 mathematics, science, and technology teaching materials; and • authorizes appropriations for an existing program of summer institutes for teachers at the Department of Energy. 

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Table of contents 

Section 2. Findings on the role of NSF in K–12 and undergraduate 

STEM education 

Expresses the finding of Congress that NSF has made a valuable 

contribution to the improvement of K–12 education and that this 

role is explicitly required by NSF’s founding authorization statute. 

Section 3. Definitions used in the bill 

TITLE I—SCIENCE SCHOLARSHIPS

Section 101. Short Title. 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds 

Science and Math Scholarship Act. 

Section 102. Findings relating the bill to the NAS report recommendations. Notes that the Gathering Storm report identifies 

recommendations the nation must take to address prosperity and 

that the report’s highest priority recommendation is to improve K–

12 STEM education. 

Section 103. Policy objective. To increase by 10,000 annually the 

number of exemplary K–12 STEM teachers. 

Section 104. Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program. Amends 

the NSF Noyce Scholarship program, established by the NSF Authorization Act of 2002, to create incentives for colleges and universities to improve the training of STEM teachers and to increase the 

size and duration of the scholarships provided for science, math, 

and engineering majors who pursue teaching credentials: 

• Provides competitive awards to institutions of higher education (or consortia of such institutions) that (1) establish 

cross-department faculty teams (science, math and engineering 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
16 

faculty along with education faculty) to develop courses of instruction leading to baccalaureate degrees in fields of science, 

mathematics, and/or engineering and also preparing graduates 

to become certified or licensed to teach in a K–12 classroom; 

and (2) administer scholarships for students during their sophomore through senior years and summer internships following 

their freshman years. • Requires early field teaching experiences for student 

teachers in the program under the supervision of highly experienced and effective teachers. • Requires awardees to provide professional development 

and mentoring support to scholarship recipients after matriculation. • Sets scholarship amounts at the cost of attendance at par- ticular institutions, not to exceed $10,000 per year, and provides up to 3 years of scholarship support for any individual. • Requires scholarship recipients to commit to teaching for 

up to 6 years following graduation (the period of teaching commitment is based on the number of years of scholarship support), reduces the commitment by one year for individuals who 

teach at high-need schools, and converts the scholarships to 

loans if the teaching commitment is not met. 

• Requires NSF to track the proportion of individuals under 

the program who carry out their teaching obligation in highneed schools, fail to complete their teaching obligation, and remain in the teaching profession beyond their service commitment, including those who remain in high-need schools. 

• Authorizes NSF to accept donations from the private sector to help support scholarships and internships. 

• Authorizes $70 million for NSF for FY 2008, $101 million 

for FY 2009, $133 million for FY 2010, $164 million for FY 

2011, and $196 million for FY 2012. 

TITLE II—MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT

Section 201. Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships 

Amendments. Amends the Mathematics and Science Education 

Partnership program established by the NSF Authorization Act of 

2002 in the following ways: 

• Authorizes teacher training activities to prepare teachers 

to teach challenging STEM education courses, including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses, 

and provides for mentoring by professional scientists, mathematicians, and engineers. 

• Authorizes the development of master’s degree programs 

for in-service STEM teachers. 

• Authorizes model induction programs for STEM teachers 

in their first 2 years of teaching. 

Section 202. Teacher institutes. Provides for teacher institute programs at NSF and the Department of Energy (DOE). 

NSF is directed to establish a grant program to support summer 

or academic year teacher institutes and authorizes summer teacher 

institutes as a component of the NSF 21st Century program. Some 

of these summer institutes must include teacher training activities 

to prepare teachers to teach challenging STEM education courses, 

including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
17 

courses. NSF is directed to give priority in awarding grants to applications that will attract STEM teachers from high-need schools. 

Authorizes $32 million for NSF for FY 2008, $35.2 million for FY 

2009, $38.7 million for FY 2010, $42.6 million for FY 2011, and 

$46.8 million for FY 2012. 

The following amounts are authorized for the existing Laboratory 

Science Teacher Professional Development program at DOE: $3 

million for FY 2008, $8 million for FY 2009, and $10 million for 

each year FY 2010 through FY 2012. 

Section 203. Graduate degree program. Requires NSF, under the 

Mathematics and Science Education Partnership program, to develop and implement master’s degree programs for in-service 

STEM teachers, who attend on a part-time basis and who will be 

able to complete the degree requirements within three years. The 

programs have the following features: 

• Provide stipends to defray the cost of attendance for teachers in the program. 

• Allow for support for the development of the courses of instruction and related educational materials and equipment (offering of online learning is an option). 

• Require the distribution of awards among institutions of 

different sizes and geographic locations. 

Authorizes $46 million for NSF for FY 2008, $50.6 million for FY 

2009, $55.7 million for FY 2010, $61.2 million for FY 2011, and 

$67.3 million for FY 2012. 

Section 204. Curricular Materials. Establishes a national panel of 

experts to identify and collect K–12 mathematics, science, and technology teaching materials that have been demonstrated to be effective and to recommend the development of new materials in areas 

where effective materials do not exist; and directs NSF and the Department of Education to develop ways to disseminate effective materials and support efforts to develop new materials, in accordance 

with the recommendations of the national panel. Emphasizes that 

the recommendations of the panel are not a mandate for specific 

K–12 curricula. 

Section 205. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

Talent Expansion Program. Amends the STEM Talent Expansion 

(STEP) program established under the NSF Authorization Act of 

2002 to create centers for improvement of undergraduate education 

in STEM fields, including centers to develop and enhance undergraduate curriculum and teaching methods and to train faculty and 

teaching assistants in effective pedagogical practices. Specifies that 

NSF is expected to provide STEP grants to a wide range of types 

of institutions, including minority-serving institutions, and that 

one goal of the STEP program is to attract individuals graduating 

from secondary schools with a concentration of students from lowincome families. 

Directs NSF to assess the effectiveness of the centers and to disseminate information about materials and methods developed. 

Authorizes $44 million for NSF for the STEP program for FY 

2008, of which $4 million is for centers; $55 million for FY 2009, 

of which $10 million is for centers; and $60 million for each year 

of FY 2010 through FY 2012, of which $10 million in each year is 

for centers. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
18 

Section 206. High-Need Local Educational Agency Definition. 

Amends the NSF Authorization Act of 2002 to redefine a high-need 

local educational agency as one that has a concentration of students from low-income families and a shortage of highly qualified 

teachers. 

Section 207. Teacher Leaders. Amends the NSF Authorization 

Act of 2002 to replace the term ‘‘master teacher’’ each place it appears with the term ‘‘teacher leader’’. 

Section 208. Laboratory Science Pilot Program. Amends the NSF 

Authorization Act of 2002 to establish a new research pilot program designated as ‘‘Partnerships for Access to Laboratory 

Science’’. The program will fund partnerships between universities, 

businesses, and high-need schools for the purpose of improving laboratory science in secondary schools. Grants funded under this program 

• must have a one-to-one cost sharing from non-federal 

sources; 

• must provide for teacher training and professional development in the effective use of laboratories; and 

• may be used for acquisition or maintenance of instrumentation and equipment and the development of instructional 

programs. 

Requires NSF to carry out an assessment of the effectiveness of 

the activities carried out under the pilot projects supported for improving student performance and to submit a report documenting 

its findings to Congress within five years of the date of enactment. 

Authorizes $5 million for NSF for FY 2008, and ‘‘such sums’’ for 

FY 2009 through FY 2011. 

Section 209. Study on Laboratory Equipment Donations for 

Schools. Requires NSF, in consultation with the Department of 

Education, to conduct a study and submit a report to Congress 

within two years of the date of enactment that documents the extent to which institutions of higher education donate used laboratory equipment to K–12 schools. 

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

National Science Foundation Role in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 

STEM education is a cornerstone of the historic mission of NSF. 

The NSF Act of 1950, which established NSF, directed the agency 

to support and strengthen STEM education programs at all levels. 

NSF has accumulated a 50–year record of accomplishment in developing highly successful STEM education programs, which are 

strongly supported by the education community. The Committee 

believes that it is vitally important that NSF continue to carry out 

its mission to improve K–12 and undergraduate STEM education. 

NSF’s peer review system, its connections with higher education, 

and its prestige give it a unique role in improving STEM education 

that cannot be duplicated at any other federal agency. 

Rising Above the Gathering Storm 

The Act strengthens and expands existing programs at NSF to 

enhance federal STEM education efforts. The National Academies 

report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, stresses the importance 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
19 

of improving K–12 education in the United States and also emphasizes the need for increasing the number of undergraduate and 

graduate students studying and choosing careers in STEM fields. 

The Committee endorses the Academies’ focus on the link between 

a technologically-educated population and the U.S. ability to innovate and remain competitive, and this Act implements key recommendations of the Gathering Storm report that relate to education. 

K–12 STEM education 

Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program 

The Committee recognizes that the preparation and retention of 

excellent K–12 teachers is essential to improving STEM education 

in the United States. The Act includes provisions for recruiting, 

training, and retaining teachers to ensure that schools have access 

to a pool of talented, qualified, and committed STEM teachers. 

The Committee strongly believes that both strong STEM content 

knowledge and excellent pedagogical skills related to that content 

are necessary for success as a K–12 STEM teacher. This Act expands the Noyce program to support and encourage the transformation of how K–12 STEM teachers are educated in this country. In addition to providing scholarships to sophomores, juniors, 

and seniors, colleges and universities receiving Noyce grants will 

be required to offer a program that provides instruction (which 

may begin as early as freshman year) and early field teaching experiences, including interactions with teacher leaders and 

coursework developed by STEM and education faculty, to allow 

participants in the program both to graduate with STEM degrees 

and to meet requirements for teacher certification or licensing. The 

Committee also believes that the colleges and universities should 

develop and implement induction programs to support graduates of 

the program in their first few years of teaching in order to improve 

the retention of Noyce program graduates in the teaching profession. 

The Committee believes that collaboration between STEM and 

education faculty is critical for the success of these programs. The 

Committee applauds the work of the University of Texas at Austin 

on its UTeach program and the University of California on its Cal 

Teach program, which are successful models of the type of teacher 

education and support program the Committee wishes to encourage. 

The UTeach program prepares students to receive degrees in a 

STEM field and a certificate to teach in 4 years. This is a desirable 

model, but that model may not work in all settings. Students who 

enter programs late, or who major in certain engineering fields, or 

who are working for licensure in certain states may not be able to 

become fully certified teachers after just 4 years. The programs 

funded by the Noyce grants should streamline the certification 

process, although that may mean reducing a 6-year program to 5, 

or a 5-year program to 4-and-a-half. 

The Committee believes that to maximize the impact of the 

teacher training programs supported through the Noyce Program, 

institutions receiving grants should make strong efforts to inform 

potential program participants about the program and the scholarVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:13 Apr 17, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR085.XXX HR085

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
20 

ships. NSF should support such recruitment efforts and use annual 

conferences of participants as opportunities to share best practices 

in recruitment as well as in other program components, such as 

coursework, mentoring, and field teaching experiences. 

The Gathering Storm report calls for federal programs to support 

recruiting 10,000 new mathematics and science teachers every 

year, and the appropriations authorized in this Act put the Noyce 

program on track to reach that level of effort in 2017. 

The Committee expects NSF to do far more to publicize and promote participation by institutions of higher education in the Noyce 

Program, especially among schools that are more known for their 

rigorous STEM programs than they are for teacher preparation. 

Community or junior colleges can participate in Noyce as part of 

a consortium, although they cannot be sole recipients of Noyce 

grants. 

The Committee expects that the preponderance of the funds for 

this program will go directly to participants in the form of scholarships and stipends. But the Committee also expects that sufficient 

funds will be allocated for capacity-building activities described in 

sections 10(a)(3)(A)(ii) and (iii) and (B)(ii) and (iii) of the NSF Act 

of 2002, as amended by this Act. The Committee also understands 

that the resources needed to initiate a teacher education program 

may exceed the level needed for steady state operation of the program. The Committee expects that NSF will ensure that resources 

are allocated under the program to ensure a sufficient investment 

in capacity-building activities, so that the program does not merely 

hand out scholarships and stipends but rather reforms the way 

teachers are educated. 

Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships 

The changes made by the Act to the existing Mathematics and 

Science Education Partnership program at NSF reflect a stronger 

focus on teacher training, especially in STEM content. The changes 

also address recommendations in this area by the Gathering Storm 

report, particularly on providing master’s degree programs for inservice teachers and summer institutes and other training programs to prepare teachers to teach challenging mathematics, 

science, and technology courses. The Committee strongly believes 

that grant applications that focus on teacher training should be 

given strong priority by NSF and that particular attention should 

be given to improving the capabilities of STEM teachers serving in 

high-need school systems. Additionally, the Committee is concerned 

about the high attrition rates for new K–12 STEM teachers and 

recommends teacher induction programs, which provide content instruction, mentoring, professional development, and other support 

to teachers in the first few years of their career, to address this 

concern. 

Also, because of the importance of improving the subject matter 

knowledge of teachers, the Act requires that the principal investigator for a partnership grant be a science, mathematics, or engineering faculty member at the grantee institution. To improve the 

focus of the partnership program, the Act requires that grants fall 

within the limits of $75,000 to $2,000,000 a year. By limiting grant 

size, the Committee hopes that proposed projects will focus on tarVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:13 Apr 17, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR085.XXX HR085

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
21 

geted approaches to improving STEM education and thus allow 

clear evaluation of the effectiveness of each project. 

In adding language allowing the development and dissemination 

of curriculum tools that will help foster inventiveness and innovation, the Committee recognizes the value of innovation in U.S. competitiveness and the economic benefits that the U.S. gains by being 

a culture that encourages and rewards innovation. To support and 

cultivate the next generation of inventive scientists and engineers, 

teachers should have access to curriculum tools that include activities such as open-ended problem solving; hands-on and ‘‘how things 

work’’ exercises; projects that emphasize creativity, design, and 

teamwork; and lessons to raise the stature of inventors and invention in the eyes of young people. 

STEM education at the undergraduate level 

Undergraduate education is the first step toward a career in 

teaching and in other science, engineering, or mathematics fields; 

it is the primary source of education and training for technical 

workers; and, it is often the last time non-majors will take a class 

in mathematics and science. The Committee believes that NSF, due 

to its close relationship with institutions of higher education and 

its expertise and experience in education at all levels, has a critical 

role to play in improving undergraduate STEM education for majors and non-majors, especially future teachers. No other Federal 

agency has a clear responsibility for undergraduate STEM education. 

The Act expands NSF’s STEP to fund the creation of centers at 

colleges and universities that will develop new approaches to undergraduate STEM education programs. The Committee intends 

that these centers focus not only on improving undergraduate 

teaching and courses at their own institutions, but also on developing and disseminating innovative curricula, laboratory experiences, and teaching and training methods that can be used 

throughout the country. The Committee expects STEP grants to 

support undergraduate education improvements in a wide variety 

of STEM fields and of types of institutions of higher education, including 2-year colleges and minority-serving institutions. 

The Committee also emphasizes the important goal of the STEP 

grants in increasing participation by individuals currently underrepresented in STEM careers, including women, minorities, and 

graduates of high schools with a concentration of students from 

low-income families. 

The Committee is also concerned that in running STEP, NSF has 

not seriously enforced the statutory requirement that an applicant 

set a numerical goal for increasing the number of STEM majors 

and that grantees be evaluated, in part, on the basis of whether 

they are meeting the numerical goals contained in their applications. The Committee expects STEP to be carried out pursuant to 

statute. This Act requires a report to Congress to ensure that NSF 

gathers data on majors at STEP institutions. 

In addition to STEP, NSF currently carries out a range of other 

programs designed to improve undergraduate STEM education, 

and the Committee strongly supports the continuation of these activities, especially the Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement program. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
22 

Curricular materials 

The committee feels that there should be better coordination 

among agencies and foundations dedicated to creating innovative 

curricular materials for K–12 STEM instruction. This Act requires 

the Director of NSF to convene a national panel to identify, collect, 

and disseminate the best available materials. The Committee does 

not intend that the recommendations of the panel constitute a 

mandate of specific K–12 curricula. 

Technology 

Engineering and technology education includes instruction in engineering design processes, human innovation, and design skills. 

The Committee expects the participation of technology instructors 

in the teacher recruitment, preparation, and professional development programs authorized in this bill. No reference to elementary 

or secondary mathematics and science education should be understood to exclude technology or pre-engineering education. 

Partnerships for Access to Laboratory Science 

The Committee believes that hands-on laboratory instruction 

should be an integral part of science and technology education in 

secondary schools and has established an NSF research program, 

Partnerships for Access to Laboratory Science, to determine best 

practices for integrating classroom instruction and laboratory exercises. The Committee expects the results of projects supported 

under this program to be carefully assessed and the findings widely 

disseminated. 

In awarding demonstration grants for Partnerships for Access to 

Laboratory Science, it is the Committee’s intention that the nonfederal partners of the partnership provide funding for activities 

described in section 8(8)(B)(i) and (ii) of the NSF Authorization Act 

of 2002, as amended by this Act, and that federal funds be primarily used to support professional development and incorporation 

of relevant research practices. 

IX. COST ESTIMATE

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on 

Science and Technology prior to the filing of this report and is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, 

clause 3(c)(3). 

H.R. 362 does not contain new budget authority, credit authority, 

or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the 

sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 362 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which is contained in 

Section X of this report. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
23 

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

H.R. 362—A bill to authorize science scholarships for educating 

mathematics and science teachers, and for other purposes 

Summary: H.R. 362 would authorize the appropriation of about $1.5 billion for several new and existing programs within the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Department of Energy 

(DOE) that support the training and professional development of 

elementary and secondary schools teachers in the fields of science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). CBO estimates 

that implementing H.R. 362 would cost $898 million over the 2008– 2012 period, assuming appropriation of the amounts authorized or 

estimated to be necessary. Enacting H.R. 362 would have no significant effect on direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 362 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA); 

the bill would benefit public institutions of higher education. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 362 is shown in the following table. The cost 

of this legislation falls within budget function 250 (general science, 

space, and technology). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Spending Under Current Law for Certain Programs Authorized by H.R. 

362 

Scholarship, Teacher Development, and Talent Expansion Programs 

Estimated Budget Authority 1 ................................................. 40 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 35 33 18 8 2 0 

Proposed Changes 

Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 70 101 133 164 196 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 8 40 75 109 141 

Teacher Institutes and Development Programs 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 35 43 49 53 57 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 4 19 32 42 48 

STEM Talent Expansion Program 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 44 55 60 60 60 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 5 24 41 52 57 

Graduate Degree Grant Program 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 46 51 56 61 67 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 6 24 39 49 56 

Laboratory Science Expansion Program 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................................ 0 5 5 5 5 0 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 1 3 4 5 4 

Other Provisions 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................................ 0 2 2 2 2 2 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 2 2 2 2 2 

Total Changes 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................................ 0 202 257 305 345 382 

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 26 112 193 259 308 

Spending Under H.R. 362 

Estimated Authorization Level ......................................................... 40 202 257 305 345 382 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 35 59 130 201 261 308 

1 The 2007 level reflects estimated appropriations for the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program; teacher institutes and development programs 

at NSF and DOE; and the STEM Talent Expansion Program. 

Basis of estimate: H.R. 362 would authorize about $1.5 billion for 

new and existing programs to provide support for undergraduate 

students and elementary and secondary school teachers in STEM 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
24 

fields. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 362 would cost $898 

million over the 2008–2012 period, assuming appropriation of the 

necessary amounts. For this estimate, CBO assumes that the legislation will be enacted before the beginning of fiscal year 2008 and 

that the necessary amounts will be appropriated each year. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for existing or similar programs. 

Authorizations for existing programs 

H.R. 362 would authorize appropriations for several existing programs at NSF and DOE, including the Robert Noyce Scholarship 

Program, the Teacher Institutes for the 21st Century program, the 

Laboratory Science Teacher Professional Development program, 

and the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent 

Expansion program. The bill would authorize $149 million for 2008 

for those programs and a total of about $1.2 billion over the 2008– 2012 period. (By comparison, about $40 million was appropriated 

for 2007.) CBO estimates that implementing these provisions would 

cost $697 million over the 2008–2012 period, assuming appropriation of the specified amounts. 

Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program. This program provides grants to institutions of higher education for scholarships and 

stipends for undergraduate students in the fields of mathematics, 

science and engineering planning to become elementary and secondary school teachers. According to NSF, about $10 million was 

provided for the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship program for 

2007. 

Section 104 would authorize the appropriation of $70 million in 2008 and a total of $664 million over the 2008–2012 period for this 

scholarship program. The bill would increase the minimum annual 

scholarship under the program from $7,500 to $10,000 and would 

extend the maximum award from two years to three years. Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO estimates that 

this program would cost $373 million over the 2008–2012 period. 

Teacher Institutes and Development. H.R. 362 would authorize 

appropriations for two programs that foster partnerships between 

researchers and those who teach math and science in elementary 

and secondary schools. Section 202 would authorize the appropriation of $32 million for 2008 and $195 million over the 2008–2012 

period for NSF’s Funding for Teacher Institutes for the 21st Century program, which received about $2 million in 2007. Assuming 

appropriation of the specified amounts, this program would cost 

$121 million over the 2008–2012 period, CBO estimates. 

Similarly, DOE’s Office of Science will spend about $2 million in 

2007 for the Laboratory Science Teacher Professional Development 

program, which provides professional development for about 300 elementary and secondary school teachers through partnerships with 

several DOE national laboratories. Section 202 would authorize the 

appropriation of $3 million for 2008 and a total of $41 million over 

the 2008–2012 period for this program. CBO estimates that outlays 

for this program would total $24 million over the 2008–2012 period, assuming appropriation of the specified amounts. 

STEM Talent Expansion Program. NSF’s STEM Talent Expansion Program (STEP) currently spends about $26 million a year for 

grants to institutions of higher education to increase the number 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
25 

of undergraduate students that complete programs in STEM fields. 

Grant funding may be used to promote research, interdisciplinary 

teaching, and other activities such as internships, student advising, 

and community college bridge programs. Section 205 would authorize the appropriation of $40 million for the STEP program for 2008 and a total of $255 million over the 

2008–2012 period. In addition, the bill would direct NSF to establish centers to support the STEP program, with funding authorized 

at $4 million in 2008 and $24 million over the 2008–2012 period. 

The centers would be responsible for developing undergraduate 

curriculum, teaching methods, and better training for professors 

and teaching assistants to increase the number of STEM graduates. CBO estimates that implementing those two initiatives 

would cost $179 million over the 2008–2012 period if the authorized funds are appropriated. 

Authorization of new initiatives 

H.R. 362 would authorize several new initiatives at NSF, including a graduate degree grant program, a Laboratory Science Pilot 

Program, and various other activities. CBO estimates that implementing those programs would cost $201 million over the 2008– 2012 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary funds. 

Graduate Degree Grant Program. Section 204 would authorize the appropriation of $281 million over the 2008–2012 period for 

grants to institutions of higher education to establish master’s degree programs for math and science teachers currently in the workforce. That funding, which would be administered by NSF’s Math 

and Science Partnership program, would be used to develop instructional materials, provide stipend support, and acquire equipment necessary to offer online instruction. CBO estimates that implementing this program would cost $174 million over the 2008– 2012 period. 

Laboratory Science Pilot Program. Section 208 would establish a 

new program at NSF that would provide grants to educational 

partnerships for purchasing laboratory equipment, maintaining 

and renovating facilities, providing safety training, and developing 

programs that integrate laboratory experience with classroom instruction. The federal cost-share for these grants would be capped 

at 50 percent. The bill would authorize the appropriation of $5 million for this program for 2008, and such sums as may be necessary 

through fiscal year 2011. CBO estimates that implementing this 

provision would cost $17 million over the 2008–2012 period. 

Other provisions. In addition, H.R. 362 would: 

Establish a program for teachers participating in the Math 

and Science Partnership to develop mentor relationships with 

industry scientists, mathematicians and engineers; 

Establish a national panel on curricular materials; and 

Direct NSF to report to the Congress on the effectiveness of 

several programs authorized by the bill. 

Based on the cost of similar activities, CBO estimates that NSF 

would spend about $10 million over the 2008–2012 period to implement those projects, assuming appropriation of the necessary 

amounts. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 362 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
26 

UMRA. The bill would authorize activities and grant funds that 

would benefit institutions of higher education. Any costs they 

might incur would result from complying with conditions of Federal 

assistance. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Daniel Hoople; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum; Impact on the Private Sector: Craig Cammarata. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4 

H.R. 362 contains no unfunded mandates. 

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The oversight findings and recommendations of the Committee 

on Science and Technology are reflected in the body of this report. 

XIII. STATEMENT ON GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND

OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of H.R. 362 

are to strengthen and expand programs at NSF 

to improve K–12 mathematics and science education through 

recruitment, training, mentoring, and professional development 

of teachers and 

to increase the number of undergraduates entering STEM 

fields. 

XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 

grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 362. 

XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 362 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of 

any advisory committee. 

XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 362 does not relate to the terms 

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1). 

XVII. EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

H.R. 362 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), 

or 9(f) of Rule XXI. 

XVIII. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL

LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or tribal law. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
27 

XIX. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AUTHORIZATION ACT 

OF 2002 

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø(8) HIGH-NEED LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.—The term 

‘‘high-need local educational agency’’ means a local educational 

agency that meets one or more of the following criteria: 

ø(A) It has at least one school in which 50 percent or 

more of the enrolled students are eligible for participation 

in the free and reduced price lunch program established by 

the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 

U.S.C. 1751 et seq.). 

ø(B) It has at least one school in which—

ø(i) more than 34 percent of the academic classroom 

teachers at the secondary level (across all academic 

subjects) do not have an undergraduate degree with a 

major or minor in, or a graduate degree in, the academic field in which they teach the largest percentage 

of their classes; or 

ø(ii) more than 34 percent of the teachers in two of 

the academic departments do not have an undergraduate degree with a major or minor in, or a graduate degree in, the academic field in which they teach 

the largest percentage of their classes. 

ø(C) It has at least one school whose teacher attrition 

rate has been 15 percent or more over the last three school 

years.¿ 

(8) HIGH-NEED LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.—The term 

‘‘high-need local educational agency’’ means a local educational 

agency that—

(A) is receiving grants under title I of the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et 

seq) as a result of having within its jurisdiction concentrations of children from low income families; and 

(B) is experiencing a shortage of highly qualified teachers, as defined in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801), in the 

fields of science, mathematics, or engineering. 

* * * * * * * 

(11) øMASTER TEACHER¿ TEACHER LEADER.—The term ‘‘ømaster teacher¿ teacher leader’’ means a mathematics or 

science teacher who works to improve the instruction of mathematics or science in kindergarten through grade 12 through—


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
28 

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(E) providing professional development, including for the 

purposes of training other ømaster teachers¿ teacher leaders, to mathematics and science teachers. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 8. SPECIFIC PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS. 

From amounts authorized to be appropriated under section 5, the 

Director shall carry out the Foundation’s research and education 

programs, including the following initiatives in accordance with 

this section: 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(6) ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.—The 

Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program described in section 10. 

(7) SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY

TALENT EXPANSION PROGRAM.—(A) A program of øcompetitive, 

merit-based, multi-year grants for eligible applicants to increase the number of students studying toward and completing 

associate’s or bachelor’s degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology, particularly in fields that have faced 

declining enrollment in recent years.¿ competitive, merit-reviewed multiyear grants for eligible applicants to improve undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, 

and technology through— (i) the creation of programs to increase the number of students studying toward and completing associate’s or bachelor’s degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, particularly in fields that have faced declining enrollment in recent years; and 

(ii) the creation of centers (in this paragraph referred to 

as ‘‘Centers’’) to develop undergraduate curriculum, teaching methods for undergraduate courses, and methods to 

better train professors and teaching assistants who teach 

undergraduate courses to increase the number of students 

completing undergraduate courses in science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics, including the number of 

nonmajors, and to improve student academic achievement 

in those courses. 

Grants made under clause (ii) shall be awarded jointly through 

the Education and Human Resources Directorate and at least 

1 research directorate of the Foundation. 

ø(B) In selecting projects under this paragraph, the Director 

shall strive to increase the number of students studying toward and completing baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, or 

certificates in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 

who are individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science 

and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 

1885b).¿ 

(B) In selecting projects under subparagraph (A)(i), the Director shall strive to increase the number of students studying toward and completing baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, or 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
29 

certificates in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 

who are—

(i) individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the 

Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 

U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b); or 

(ii) graduates of a secondary school that is administered 

by a local educational agency that is receiving grants under 

title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq) as a result of having within 

its jurisdiction concentrations of children from low income 

families. 

(C)(i) The types of projects the Foundation may support 

øunder this paragraph¿ under subparagraph (A)(i) include 

those that promote high quality— ø(i)¿ (I) interdisciplinary teaching; 

ø(ii)¿ (II) undergraduate-conducted research; 

ø(iii)¿ (III) mentor relationships for students; 

ø(iv)¿ (IV) bridge programs that enable students at community colleges to matriculate directly into baccalaureate 

science, mathematics, engineering, or technology programs; 

ø(v)¿ (V) internships carried out in partnership with industry; and 

ø(vi)¿ (VI) innovative uses of digital technologies, particularly at institutions of higher education that serve high 

numbers or percentages of economically disadvantaged 

students. 

(ii) The types of activities the Foundation may support under 

subparagraph (A)(ii) include— (I) creating model curricula and laboratory programs; 

(II) developing and demonstrating research-based instructional methods and technologies; 

(III) developing methods to train graduate students and 

faculty to be more effective teachers of undergraduates; 

(IV) conducting programs to disseminate curricula, instructional methods, or training methods to faculty at the 

grantee institutions and at other institutions; 

(V) conducting assessments of the effectiveness of the Center at accomplishing the goals described in subparagraph 

(A)(ii); and 

(VI) conducting any other activities the Director determines will accomplish the goals described in subparagraph 

(A)(ii). 

(D)(i) In order to receive a grant øunder this paragraph¿ 

under subparagraph (A)(i), an eligible applicant shall establish 

targets to increase the number of students studying toward 

and completing associate’s or bachelor’s degrees in science, 

mathematics, engineering, or technology. 

(ii) A grant øunder this paragraph¿ under subparagraph 

(A)(i) shall be awarded for a period of 5 years, with the final 

2 years of funding contingent on the Director’s determination 

that satisfactory progress has been made by the grantee toward meeting the targets established under clause (i). 

(iii) In the case of community colleges, a student who transfers to a baccalaureate program, or receives a certificate under 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
30 

an established certificate program, in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology shall be counted toward meeting a target established under clause (i). 

(iv) A grant under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be awarded for 

5 years, and the Director may extend such a grant for up to 2 

additional 3 year periods. 

(E) For each grant awarded øunder this paragraph¿ under 

subparagraph (A)(i) to an institution of higher education, at 

least 1 principal investigator shall be in a position of administrative leadership at the institution of higher education, and at 

least 1 principal investigator shall be a faculty member from 

an academic department included in the work of the project. 

For each grant awarded to a consortium or partnership, at 

each institution of higher education participating in the consortium or partnership, at least 1 of the individuals responsible 

for carrying out activities authorized øunder this paragraph¿ 

under subparagraph (A)(i) at that institution shall be in a position of administrative leadership at the institution, and at 

least 1 shall be a faculty member from an academic department included in the work of the project at that institution. 

(F) Grants awarded under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be carried out by a department or departments of science, mathematics, or engineering at institutions of higher education (or a 

consortia thereof), which may partner with education faculty. 

Applications for awards under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be 

submitted to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 

containing such information as the Director may require. At a 

minimum, the application shall include— (i) a description of the activities to be carried out by the 

Center; 

(ii) a plan for disseminating programs related to the activities carried out by the Center to faculty at the grantee 

institution and at other institutions; 

(iii) an estimate of the number of faculty, graduate students (if any), and undergraduate students who will be affected by the activities carried out by the Center; and 

(iv) a plan for assessing the effectiveness of the Center at 

accomplishing the goals described in subparagraph (A)(ii). 

(G) In evaluating the applications submitted under subparagraph (F), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(i) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the 

proposed activities, including the dissemination activities 

described in subparagraph (C)(ii)(IV); and 

(ii) the extent to which the faculty, staff, and administrators of the applicant institution are committed to improving 

undergraduate science, mathematics, and engineering education. 

(H) In awarding grants under subparagraph (A)(ii), the Director shall endeavor to ensure that a wide variety of science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics fields and types of institutions of higher education, including 2-year colleges and minority-serving institutions, are covered, and that—

(i) at least 1 Center is housed at a Doctoral/Research 

University as defined by the Carnegie Foundation for the 

Advancement of Teaching; and 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
31 

(ii) at least 1 Center is focused on improving undergraduate education in an interdisciplinary area. 

(I) The Director shall convene an annual meeting of the 

awardees under this paragraph to foster collaboration and to 

disseminate the results of the Centers and the other activities 

funded under this paragraph. 

ø(F)¿ (J) In this paragraph, the term ‘‘eligible applicant’’ means—

(i) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(8) SECONDARY SCHOOL SYSTEMIC INITIATIVE.—(A) A program of competitive, merit-based grants for State educational 

agencies or local educational agencies that supports the planning and implementation of agency-wide secondary school reform initiatives designed to promote scientific and technological literacy, meet the mathematics and science education 

needs of students at risk of not achieving State student academic achievement standards, reduce the need for basic skill 

training by employers, and heighten college completion rates 

through activities, such as— ø(A)¿ (i) systemic alignment of secondary school curricula and higher education freshman placement requirements; 

ø(B)¿ (ii) development of materials and curricula that 

support small, theme-oriented schools and learning communities; 

ø(C)¿ (iii) implementation of enriched mathematics and 

science curricula for all secondary school students; 

ø(D)¿ (iv) strengthened teacher training in mathematics, 

science, and reading as it relates to technical and specialized texts; 

ø(E)¿ (v) laboratory improvement and provision of instrumentation as part of a comprehensive program to enhance the quality of mathematics, science, engineering, 

and technology instruction; or 

ø(F)¿ (vi) other secondary school systemic initiatives 

that enable grantees to leverage private sector funding for 

mathematics, science, engineering, and technology scholarships. 

(B) In accordance with subparagraph (A)(v), the Director 

shall establish a research pilot program designated as ‘‘Partnerships for Access to Laboratory Science’’ to award grants to partnerships to improve laboratories and provide instrumentation 

as part of a comprehensive program to enhance the quality of 

mathematics, science, engineering, and technology instruction 

at the secondary school level. Grants under this subparagraph 

may be used for— (i) purchase, rental, or leasing of equipment, instrumentation, and other scientific educational materials; 

(ii) maintenance, renovation, and improvement of laboratory facilities; 

(iii) development of instructional programs designed to 

integrate the laboratory experience with classroom instruction and to be consistent with State mathematics and 

science academic achievement standards; 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
32 

(iv) training in laboratory safety for school personnel; 

(v) design and implementation of hands-on laboratory experiences to encourage the interest of individuals identified 

in section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal 

Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b) in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology and help prepare such individuals to pursue postsecondary studies in 

these fields; and 

(vi) assessment of the activities funded under this subparagraph. 

(C) Grants may be made under subparagraph (B) only to a 

partnership—

(i) for a project that includes significant teacher training 

and professional development components; or 

(ii) that establishes that appropriate teacher training and 

professional development is being addressed, or has been 

addressed, through other means. 

(D) Grants awarded under subparagraph (B) shall be to a 

partnership that—

(i) includes an institution of higher education or a community college; 

(ii) includes a high-need local educational agency; 

(iii) includes a business or eligible nonprofit organization; and 

(iv) may include a State educational agency, other public 

agency, National Laboratory, or community-based organization. 

(E) The Federal share of the cost of activities carried out 

using amounts from a grant under subparagraph (B) shall not 

exceed 50 percent. 

(F) The Director shall require grant recipients to submit a report to the Director on the results of the project supported by 

the grant. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 9. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS. 

(a) PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—(A) The Director shall carry out a program 

to award grants to institutions of higher education or eligible 

nonprofit organizations (or consortia of such institutions or organizations) to establish mathematics and science education 

partnership programs to improve elementary and secondary 

mathematics and science instruction. 

(B) Grants shall be awarded under this subsection on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis. 

(2) PARTNERSHIPS.—ø(A)¿ In order to be eligible to receive a 

grant under this subsection, an institution of higher education, 

through 1 or more of its departments in science, mathematics, 

or engineering, or eligible nonprofit organization (or consortium 

of such institutions or organizations) shall enter into a partnership with one or more local educational agencies that may also 

include øa State educational agency¿ education faculty from 

the participating institution or institutions of higher education, 

a State educational agency, or one or more businesses. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
33 

ø(B) A participating institution of higher education shall include mathematics, science, or engineering departments in the 

programs carried out through a partnership under this paragraph.¿ 

(3) USES OF FUNDS.—Grants awarded under this subsection 

shall be used for activities that draw upon the expertise of the 

partners to improve elementary or secondary education in 

mathematics or science and that are consistent with State 

mathematics and science student academic achievement standards, including— (A) * * * 

(B) offering content-specific professional development 

programs, including summer or academic year institutes or 

workshops, which are designed to strengthen the capabilities of mathematics and science teachers and which may 

include teacher training activities to prepare mathematics 

and science teachers to teach challenging mathematics, 

science, and technology college-preparatory courses, including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 

courses; 

(C) offering innovative preservice and inservice programs that instruct teachers on using technology and laboratory experiences more effectively in teaching mathematics and science, including programs that recruit and 

train undergraduate and graduate students to provide 

technical and laboratory support to teachers; 

* * * * * * * 

(E) developing a cadre of ømaster teachers¿ teacher leaders who will promote reform and improvement in schools; 

* * * * * * * 

(I) developing initiatives to increase and sustain the 

number, quality, and diversity of prekindergarten through 

grade 12 teachers of mathematics and science, including 

model induction programs for teachers in their first 2 years 

of teaching, especially in underserved areas; 

* * * * * * * 

(K) ødeveloping and offering mathematics or science enrichment programs for students, including after-school and 

summer programs;¿ developing educational programs and 

materials and conducting mathematics, science, and technology enrichment programs for students, including afterschool programs and summer camps for students described 

in subsection (b)(2)(G); 

* * * * * * * 

(4) øMASTER TEACHERS¿ TEACHER LEADERS.—Activities carried out in accordance with paragraph (3)(E) shall—

(A) emphasize the training of ømaster teachers¿ teacher 

leaders who will improve the instruction of mathematics or 

science in kindergarten through grade 12; 

* * * * * * * 

(C) provide training only to teachers who will be granted 

sufficient nonclassroom time to serve as ømaster teachers¿ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
34 

teacher leaders, as demonstrated by assurances their employing school has provided to the Director, in such time 

and such manner as the Director may require. 

* * * * * * * 

(8) MASTER’S DEGREE PROGRAMS.—Activities carried out in 

accordance with paragraph (3)(B) shall include the development 

and offering of master’s degree programs for in-service mathematics and science teachers that will strengthen their subject 

area knowledge and pedagogical skills, as described in section 

203 of the Act enacting this paragraph. Grants provided under 

this section may be used to develop and implement courses of 

instruction for the master’s degree programs, which may involve 

online learning, and develop related educational materials. 

(9) MENTORS FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS OF CHALLENGING

COURSES.—Partnerships carrying out activities to prepare 

mathematics and science teachers to teach challenging mathematics, science, and technology college-preparatory courses, including Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 

courses, in accordance with paragraph (3)(B) shall encourage 

companies employing scientists, mathematicians, or engineers to 

provide mentors to teachers and students and provide for the 

coordination of such mentoring activities. 

(10) INVENTIVENESS.—Activities carried out in accordance 

with paragraph (3)(H) may include the development and dissemination of curriculum tools that will help foster inventiveness and innovation. 

(b) SELECTION PROCESS.—

(1) * * * 

(2) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications 

submitted under paragraph (1), the Director shall consider, at 

a minimum—

(A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(E) the extent to which the evaluation described in paragraph (1)(E) will be independent and based on objective 

measures; 

ø(E)¿ (F) the likelihood that the partnership will demonstrate activities that can be widely implemented as part 

of larger scale reform efforts; and 

ø(F)¿ (G) the extent to which the activities will encourage the interest of individuals identified in section 33 or 34 

of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act 

(42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b) in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology and will help prepare such individuals to pursue postsecondary studies in these fields. 

* * * * * * * 

(4) MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM GRANT SIZE.—A grant awarded 

under this section shall be not less than $75,000 or greater than 

$2,000,000 for any fiscal year. 

(c) ACCOUNTABILITY AND DISSEMINATION.—

(1) * * * 

ø(2) DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS.—(A) The results of the evaluation required under paragraph (1) shall be made available to 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
35 

the public and shall be provided to the Committee on Science 

of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee 

on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate. 

ø(B) Materials developed under the program established 

under subsection (a) that are demonstrated to be effective shall 

be made widely available to the public.¿ 

(2) REPORT ON MODEL PROJECTS.—The Director shall determine which completed projects funded through the program 

under this section should be seen as models to be replicated on 

a more expansive basis at the State or national levels. Not later 

than 1 year after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the 

Director shall transmit a report describing the results of this 

study to the Committee on Science and Technology and the 

Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions of the Senate. 

(3) REPORT ON EVALUATIONS.—Not later than 4 years after 

the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Director shall 

transmit a report summarizing the evaluations required under 

subsection (b)(1)(E) of grants received under this program and 

describing any changes to the program recommended as a result of these evaluations to the Committee on Science and Technology and the Committee on Education and Labor of the 

House of Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation and the Committee on Health, 

Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate. Such report 

shall be made widely available to the public. 

ø(3)¿ (4) ANNUAL MEETING.—The Director, in consultation 

with the Secretary of Education, shall convene an annual 

meeting of the partnerships participating under this section to 

foster greater national collaboration. 

ø(4)¿ (5) REPORT ON COORDINATION.—The Director, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall provide an annual report to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee 

on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate describing how the program authorized under this section has 

been and will be coordinated with the program authorized 

under part B of title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.). The report under 

this paragraph shall be submitted along with the President’s 

annual budget request. 

ø(5)¿ (6) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—At the request of an eligible partnership or a State educational agency, the Director 

shall provide the partnership or agency with technical assistance in meeting any requirements of this section, including 

providing advice from experts on how to develop— (A) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section—


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
36 

(1) the term ‘‘mathematics and science teacher’’ means a 

mathematics, science, or technology teacher at the elementary 

school or secondary school level; and 

(2) the term ‘‘science’’, in the context of elementary and secondary education, includes technology and pre-engineering. 

SEC. 10. ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. 

(a) SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall carry out a program to 

award grants to institutions of higher education (or consortia 

of such institutions) øto provide scholarships, stipends, and 

programming designed¿ to recruit and train mathematics and 

science teachers and to provide scholarships and stipends to 

students participating in the program. Such program shall be 

known as the ‘‘Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program’’. 

* * * * * * * 

(3) USE OF GRANTS.—Grants provided under this section 

shall be used by institutions of higher education or consortia— (A) to develop and implement a program to øencourage 

top college juniors and seniors¿ recruit and prepare undergraduate students majoring in mathematics, science, and 

engineering at the grantee’s institution to become qualified 

as mathematics and science teachers, through— (i) * * * 

(ii) offering øprograms to help scholarship recipients¿ academic courses and early field teaching experiences designed to prepare students participating in the 

program to teach in elementary schools and secondary 

schools, including øprograms that will result in¿ such 

preparation as is necessary to meet requirements for 

teacher certification or licensing; øand¿ 

(iii) offering programs to øscholarship recipients¿ 

students participating in the program, both before and 

after they receive their baccalaureate degree, to øenable the recipients¿ enable the students to become better mathematics and science teachers, to fulfill the 

service requirements of this section, and to exchange 

ideas with others in their fields; øor¿ and 

(iv) providing summer internships for freshman students participating in the program; or 

(B) to develop and implement a program to øencourage¿ 

recruit and prepare science, mathematics, or engineering 

professionals to become qualified as mathematics and 

science teachers, through— (i) * * * 

ø(ii) offering programs to help stipend recipients obtain teacher certification or licensing; and¿ 

(ii) offering academic courses and field teaching experiences designed to prepare stipend recipients to 

teach in elementary schools and secondary schools, including such preparation as is necessary to meet requirements for teacher certification or licensing; and 

* * * * * * * 

(4) ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT.—To be eligible for an award 

under this section, an institution of higher education (or conVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:13 Apr 17, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR085.XXX HR085

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
37 

sortia of such institutions) shall ensure that specific faculty 

members and staff from the institution’s mathematics, science, 

or engineering departments and specific education faculty are 

designated to carry out the development and implementation of 

the program. An institution of higher education may also include teacher leaders to participate in developing the pedagogical content of the program and to supervise students participating in the program in their field teaching experiences. No 

institution of higher education shall be eligible for an award 

unless faculty from the institution’s mathematics, science, or engineering departments are active participants in the program. 

(b) SELECTION PROCESS.—

(1) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education or consortium seeking funding under this section shall submit an application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 

containing such information as the Director may require. The 

application shall include, at a minimum—

(A) a description of the øscholarship or stipend¿ program 

that the applicant intends to operate, including the number of scholarships and summer internships or the size and 

number of stipends the applicant intends to award, the 

type of activities proposed for the recruitment of students to 

the program, and the selection process that will be used in 

awarding the scholarships or stipends; 

(B) evidence that the applicant has the capability to administer the øscholarship or stipend¿ program in accordance with the provisions of this sectionø; and¿, which may 

include a description of any existing programs at the applicant’s institution that are targeted to the education of 

mathematics and science teachers and the number of teachers graduated annually from such programs; 

ø(C) a description of the programming that will be offered to scholarship or stipend recipients during and after 

their matriculation in the program for which the scholarship or stipend is received.¿ 

(C) a description of the academic courses and field teaching experiences required under subsection (a)(3)(A)(ii) and 

(B)(ii), including—

(i) a description of the undergraduate program that 

will enable a student to graduate within 5 years with 

a major in mathematics, science, or engineering and to 

obtain teacher certification or licensing; 

(ii) a description of the field teaching experiences 

proposed; and 

(iii) evidence of agreements between the applicant 

and the schools or school districts that are identified as 

the locations at which field teaching experiences will 

occur; 

(D) a description of the programs required under subsection (a)(3)(A)(iii) and (B)(iii), including activities to assist new teachers in fulfilling their service requirements 

under this section; and 

(E) an identification of the applicant’s mathematics, 

science, or engineering faculty and its education faculty 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
38 

who will carry out the development and implementation of 

the program as required under subsection (a)(4). 

(2) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications 

submitted under paragraph (1), the Director shall consider, at 

a minimum—

(A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out 

the program; 

(B) the extent to which the applicant’s mathematics, 

science, or engineering faculty and its education faculty 

have worked or will work collaboratively to design new or 

revised curricula that recognizes the specialized pedagogy 

required to teach mathematics, science, and technology effectively in elementary and secondary schools; 

ø(B)¿ (C) the extent to which the applicant is committed 

to making the program a central organizational focus; 

ø(C)¿ (D) the degree to which the proposed programming 

will enable scholarship or stipend recipients to become successful mathematics and science teachers; 

ø(D)¿ (E) the number and quality of the students that 

will be served by the program; and 

ø(E) the ability of the applicant to recruit students who 

would otherwise not pursue a career in teaching.¿ 

(F) the ability of the applicant to recruit students who are 

individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 

Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 

1885b). 

(c) SCHOLARSHIP REQUIREMENTS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Scholarships under this section shall be 

available only to students who are— (A) * * * 

(B) in the last ø2 years¿ 3 years of a baccalaureate degree program. 

* * * * * * * 

(3) AMOUNT.—The Director shall establish for each year the 

amount to be awarded for scholarships under this section for 

that year, which shall be not less than ø$7,500¿ $10,000 per 

year, except that no individual shall receive for any year more 

than the cost of attendance at that individual’s institution. Individuals may receive a maximum of ø2 years of scholarship 

support¿ 3 years of scholarship support, unless the Director establishes a policy by which part-time students may receive additional years of support. 

(4) SERVICE OBLIGATION.—If an individual receives a scholarship, that individual shall be required to complete, within ø6 

years¿ 8 years after graduation from the baccalaureate degree 

program for which the scholarship was awarded, 2 years of 

service as a mathematics or science teacher for each year a 

scholarship was received, with a maximum service requirement 

of 6 years. øService required under this paragraph shall be performed in a high-need local educational agency.¿ 

(5) EXCEPTION.—The period of service obligation under paragraph (4) is reduced by 1 year for scholarship recipients whose 

service is performed in a high-need local educational agency. 

(d) STIPENDS.—


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
39 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Stipends under this section shall be available only to mathematics, science, and engineering professionals who, while receiving the stipend, are enrolled in a program øto receive certification or licensing to teach¿ established 

under subsection (a)(3)(B). 

(2) SELECTION.—Individuals shall be selected to receive stipends under this section primarily on the basis of academic 

merit and professional achievement, with consideration given 

to financial need and to the goal of promoting the participation 

of individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 

Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 

1885b). 

(3) DURATION.—Individuals may receive a maximum of ø1 

year¿ 16 months of stipend support. 

(4) SERVICE OBLIGATION.—If an individual receives a stipend 

under this section, that individual shall be required to complete, within ø6 years¿ 4 years after graduation from the program for which the stipend was awarded, 2 years of service as 

a mathematics or science teacher øfor each year a stipend was 

received¿. Service required under this paragraph shall be performed in a high-need local educational agency. 

* * * * * * * 

(g) FAILURE TO COMPLETE SERVICE OBLIGATION.—

(1) * * * 

(2) AMOUNT OF REPAYMENT.—(A) If a circumstance described 

in paragraph (1) occurs before the completion of one year of a 

service obligation under this section, the United States shall be 

entitled to recover from the individual, within one year after 

the date of the occurrence of such circumstance, an amount 

equal to—

(i) * * * 

(ii) the interest on the amounts of such awards which 

would be payable if at the time the awards were received 

they were loans bearing interest at the maximum legal 

prevailing rate, as determined by the øTreasurer of the 

United States,¿ Treasurer of the United States. 

ømultiplied by 2.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

(i) DEFINITIONS.—In this section—

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(3) the term ‘‘mathematics, science, or engineering professional’’ means a person who holds a baccalaureate, masters, or 

doctoral degree in science, mathematics, or engineering and is 

working in or had a career in that field or a related area; 

(4) the term ‘‘scholarship’’ means an award under subsection 

(c); øand¿ 

(5) the term ‘‘stipend’’ means an award under subsection 

(d)ø.¿; and 

(6) the term ‘‘teacher leader’’ means a mathematics or science 

teacher who works to improve the instruction of mathematics or 

science in kindergarten through grade 12 through—


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
40 

(A) participating in the development or revision of 

science, mathematics, engineering, or technology curricula; 

(B) serving as a mentor to mathematics or science teachers; 

(C) coordinating and assisting teachers in the use of 

hands-on inquiry materials, equipment, and supplies, and 

when appropriate, supervising acquisition and repair of 

such materials; 

(D) providing in-classroom teaching assistance to mathematics or science teachers; and 

(E) providing professional development, for the purposes 

of training other teacher leaders, to mathematics and 

science teachers. 

(j) MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE SCHOLARSHIP GIFT FUND.—In accordance with section 11(f) of the National Science Foundation Act 

of 1950, the Director is authorized to accept donations from the private sector to support scholarships, stipends, or internships associated with programs under this section. 

(k) ASSESSMENT OF TEACHER SERVICE AND RETENTION.—Not 

later than 4 years after the date of enactment of this subsection, the 

Director shall transmit to Congress a report on the effectiveness of 

the program carried out under this section. The report shall include 

the proportion of individuals receiving scholarships or stipends 

under the program who —

(1) fulfill their service obligation required under this section 

in a high-need local educational agency; 

(2) elect to fulfill their service obligation in a high-need local 

educational agency but fail to complete it, as defined in subsection (g); 

(3) remain in the teaching profession beyond their service obligation; and 

(4) remain in the teaching profession in a high-need local 

educational agency beyond their service obligation. 

(l) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the Director for the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program—

(1) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

(2) $101,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; 

(3) $133,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; 

(4) $164,000,000 for fiscal year 2011; and 

(5) $196,000,000 for fiscal year 2012. 

* * * * * * * 

XX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On March 28, 2007, the Committee on Science and Technology 

favorably reported H.R. 362, as amended, by a voice vote and recommended its enactment. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
41 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 51 HR85.001
42 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 52 HR85.002
(43) 

XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 362, ‘‘10,000 

TEACHERS, 10 MILLION MINDS’’ SCIENCE 

AND MATH SCHOLARSHIP ACT 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2007 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:07 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bart Gordon 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman GORDON. Good morning. The Committee on Science 

and Technology will come to order. 

Pursuant to notice, the Committee meets to consider the following measures: H.R. 362, ‘‘10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds’’

Math and Science Scholarship Act; H. Con. Res. 76, Honoring the 

50th Anniversary of the International Geophysical Year; and H.R. 

252, Recognizing the 45th Anniversary of John Herschel Glenn Jr.’s 

Historic Achievement in Becoming the First United States Astronaut 

to Orbit the Earth. 

We will now proceed with the markup. 

Today, we are meeting to markup three bipartisan bills. 

I realize that I am starting to sound like a broken record, but 

I sincerely hope that the Committee on Science and Technology is 

a place where Members of both parties can come together to get 

work done on important issues in a bipartisan way. 

The important, non-partisan issue of this markup is competitiveness. This is one of the most critical issues facing our nation today. 

H.R. 362, the ‘‘10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds’’ Science and 

Math Scholarship Act, which I sponsored and which my friend, 

Ralph Hall, co-sponsored, takes a big step forward in dealing with 

the vital issues. 

Together with H.R. 363, which this committee reported out earlier this month, these bills take the recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences ‘‘Rising Above the Gathering Storm’’ report, and turn them into real legislation that will make a difference. 

In addition to H.R. 362, we are also marking up two other bills. 

H. Con. Res. 76 is a resolution honoring the 50th anniversary of 

the International Geophysical Year, an international cooperative 

initiative that led to significant advances in space and Earth 

science, and which was marked by the dawn of the Space Age. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
44 

H.Res. 252 recognizes the 45th anniversary of John Glenn’s historic space mission, in which he became the first American to orbit 

the Earth. 

The space race of the 1950’s and 1960’s helped advance—to drive 

scientific achievement and technological innovation in the 20th century, and it is fitting that today, as we honor the scientific and 

technological achievements of the past, we are also helping to ensure this country’s ability to make these great gains in the future. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Gordon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BART GORDON

Today we are meeting to markup three bipartisan bills. 

I realize that I’m starting to sound like a broken record, but I sincerely hope that 

the Committee on Science and Technology is a place where Members of both parties 

can come together to get work done on important issues in a bipartisan way. 

The important, non-partisan issue of this markup is U.S. competitiveness. This 

is one of the most critical issues facing our nation today. H.R. 362, the ‘‘10,000 

Teachers, 10 Million Minds’’ Science and Math Scholarship Act, which I sponsored 

and Ralph Hall co-sponsored, takes a big step forward in dealing with this vital 

issue. 

Together with H.R. 363, which this committee reported out earlier this month, 

these bills take recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences ‘‘Rising 

Above the Gathering Storm’’ report, and turn them into real legislation that will 

make a difference. 

In addition to H.R. 362, we are also marking up two other bills. 

H.Con.Res. 76 is a resolution honoring the 50th anniversary of the International 

Geophysical Year, an international cooperative initiative that led to significant advances in space and Earth science, and which was marked by the dawn of the Space 

Age. 

H.Res. 252 recognizes the 45th anniversary of John Glenn’s historic space mission 

in which he became the first American to orbit the Earth. 

The space race of the 1950’s and 1960’s helped to drive scientific achievement and 

technological innovation in the 20th century. 

It is fitting that today, as we honor the scientific and technological achievements 

of the past, we are also helping to insure this country’s ability to make these great 

gains in the future. 

Chairman GORDON. I recognize Mr. Hall to present his opening 

remarks. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I thank you, of course, as usual, as 

normal, for calling this markup today. 

We have before us three measures, as you have stated, and a 

very important piece of innovation and competitiveness agenda 

that targets improving the caliber of our future K–12 math and 

science teachers and two space-related resolutions. 

With regard to H.R. 362, I am very pleased to see us considering 

the bill. It has many of the elements that this committee passed 

last year. As I have stated before, I am especially pleased to see 

that we are using the University of Texas’s UTeach program for 

the basis for a scholarship program for STEM students who commit 

to teaching K–12 science and math classes after graduation. 

Now I understand that there will be an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered to H.R. 362, which includes agreed-upon 

improvements to the bill. 

Mr. Chairman, I really do thank you for working with our side, 

as you have always done, on making these improvements, not only 

to the underlying measure, but also with regards to H.R. 524, the 

Partnership for Access to Laboratory Science Act, which I believe is 

also going to be offered as an amendment to H.R. 362. 

Okay. With that, I yield back my time. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
45 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this markup today. We have before us three 

measures: an important piece of the innovation and competitiveness agenda that 

targets improving the caliber of our future K–12 math and science teachers and two 

space-related resolutions. 

With regard to H.R. 362, I am pleased to see us considering a bill that has many 

of the elements that this committee passed last year. As I have stated before, I am 

especially pleased to see that we are using the University of Texas UTeach program 

as the basis for a scholarship program for STEM students who commit to teaching 

K–12 science and math classes after graduation. 

I understand there will be an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered 

to H.R. 362 which includes agreed upon improvements to the bill. I thank the Chairman for working with our side on making these improvements not only to the underlying measure, but also with regards to H.R. 524, the Partnerships for Access to 

Laboratory Science Act, which I believe is also going to be offered as an amendment 

to H.R. 362. I recognize the hard work that Ms. Johnson and Dr. Ehlers have made 

in ensuring that the areas where NSF has real expertise are prioritized. I would 

have preferred to have seen statutory language prohibiting federal funding from 

being used for the purchase of lab equipment and the maintenance of lab facilities 

in this amendment. I appreciate the willingness of the majority to work with us to 

ensure that report language is strongly worded to emphasize that it is the Committee’s intent for the non-federal partners to provide the funding for equipment and 

facility maintenance and improvements. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Hall, for your support of the 

bill and, more importantly, for your good additions to make a good 

bill even better. 

Without objection, Members may place statements in the record 

at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hooley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DARLENE HOOLEY

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to speak briefly in support of this legislation, 

H.R. 362, and applaud you for your leadership in bringing this important legislation 

before the Full Committee. 

As we all know, the idea for this legislation was included in the Augustine Report 

that was compiled by the National Academies of Science. The Report identified this 

initiative as being the most important step to increase America’s talent pool by vastly improving K–12 science and mathematics education. 

As the Members of this committee know, the key to the United States maintaining its position at the forefront of global innovation and technology is to get more 

students interested in the STEM fields. 

Our nation’s economic vitality is derived in large part from the productivity of 

well-trained people and the steady stream of scientific and technical innovations 

they produce. 

After years of inattention and neglect, this legislation is an important first step 

towards a re-investment in our nation’s STEM education. And it will in turn positively benefit the American Competitiveness Initiative. 

Once again, I applaud the Chairman for his leadership on this issue and I urge 

my colleagues to support this legislation. 

Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRY E. MITCHELL

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I taught high school in Arizona for 28 years, and I know that my fellow teachers 

work hard and do a good job with the resources they have. 

But I was also a State Senator for eight years, and I know our schools need help. 

Arizona’s students are below the national averages in every subject area. On average, Arizona’s teachers teach six children more per class than the national average. 

That’s a problem. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
46 

Arizona must increase the number of highly qualified teachers and lower the student to teacher ratio. 

As a former educator, I understand first-hand the impact education that has on 

our children and their future. I appreciate Chairman Gordon’s leadership on this 

issue, and I am pleased to see the Chairman’s legislation works to increase the 

number of qualified science and math teachers. 

Ensuring that our students receive a first-rate education is vital not only to Arizo- na’s but our nation’s future. As a former teacher, I believe that if we want to successfully compete and prosper in the 21st Century, we must make education a national priority. 

The National Academy of Science was asked how the United States can accomplish this goal. Their report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, recommends action 

to recruit highly qualified science and math teachers and implement programs to 

strengthen the skills of our current teachers. 

I wholeheartedly agree. 

To continue to compete in the global economy we need to increase the number of 

science and technology graduates and our schools need the resources to successfully 

educate our children. 

Today, we are considering a bill to address this issue and I look forward to working on it. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. We will now consider H.R. 362, ‘‘10,000 

Teachers, 10 Million Minds’’ Science and Math Scholarship Act, 

and I yield myself five minutes to describe this bill. 

In 2005, the National Academies, and I might add, at the request 

of Chairman Sherry Boehlert and myself, assembled a Blue Ribbon 

Committee to address concerns about the national prosperity and 

the global economy of the 21st century. This committee was chaired 

by Norm Augustine and was comprised of a broad spectrum of national leaders in academia, industry, and government. The Committee’s report was entitled ‘‘Rising Above the Gathering Storm: 

Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future.’’ That report, which was released in its present form just 

three weeks ago, presents recommendations that the Nation must 

follow to maintain its competitiveness in a global economy. 

And what is the highest-priority recommendation of the report? 

What did this distinguished committee tell us is most important for 

the future economic health of our nation? 

Here is the first recommendation from the report: ‘‘Increase 

America’s talent pool by vastly improving K–12 science and 

mathematic education.’’ And that is what H.R. 362 will do. 

The Gathering Storm report goes on to tell us where the focus 

should be in efforts to improve K–12 science and mathematic education. In brief, it says focus on the teachers. And that is what H.R. 

362 will do. 

The bill implements all the action items from the Gathering 

Storm report that address the report’s first recommendation. The 

bill will create thousands of new teachers with content and expertise in teaching in their area—or their area of teaching via the 

North Scholarship Program at NSF. The bill will create summer institutes and graduate programs that provide sustained, content-oriented, professional development to teachers through math-science 

partnerships at the NSF, and the bill will create centers for improvement of undergraduate education in STEM fields via the 

STEP program at NSF. 

To maintain our nation’s high standard of living, we will need to 

sustain our world-class science and technology enterprise that creates innovative, new products and high-paying jobs. To sustain this 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
47 

science and technology enterprise, we need to—a workforce that is 

prepared in a world-class math and science education system. 

But American students have performed poorly on an assortment 

of international tests in math and science achievement. That does 

not bode well for the future. That is the ‘‘gathering storm’’ on the 

horizon. To rise above it, we need to reform the math and science 

teaching profession, and that is what H.R. 362 will do. 

The stakes are high, and the concern is urgent, and I urge support of this bill. 

And let me also put the Members on notice that this bill is supported by, you know, so many folks, that it is really hard—and I 

am not going to go over all of them, but the Business Roundtable, 

the—excuse me, you know, every kind of math and science and 

education, physics group that there is has—and this—I am just 

going to read you some of the ones that are sort of interesting: the 

American Society for Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning 

Engineers, I mean, this cuts across a lot of folks; the Business 

Roundtable; the Association of Community Colleges, the Hispanic 

Association of Colleges and Universities, every kind of teacher 

group, the Semiconductor Industry Association. There is just an 

enormous amount of support for this bill. 

And let me also say that when Norm Augustine first spoke to us, 

I mentioned to him that what he brought to us wasn’t particularly 

ground-breaking. He didn’t bring us any new ideas. All he did was 

take what we know and what has been told to us over and over 

and made a compilation. And this bill, my bill, is not very creative, 

either. I even plagiarized the name that he used: ‘‘10,000 Teachers 

for 10 Million Minds.’’ So we are not trying to break new ground here. We are just trying to act on what we know needs to be done. 

And I recognize Mr. Hall to present any remarks on his own— any of his remarks on the bill. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I just, once again, want to thank you 

and your staff for working with our staff in improving the underlying bill. 

I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Does anyone else wish to be recognized? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GORDON. Yes, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. First of all, let me add, this bill we are talking about basically provides scholarships for students who would 

then teach in high school and other mathematics and science 

courses, is that right? 

Chairman GORDON. Well, it does a couple of things. One, it does 

provide competitive scholarships for students that will go into 

math, science, and education and agree to teach for five years. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Agree to teach for five years. 

Chairman GORDON. Right. In addition to that, it provides stipends for existing math and science teachers to come back to school 

in the summer and get their certification. 

The reason for that is it is amazing to think about this, but over 

50 percent of the math teachers in K–12 have neither a major or 

a certification to teach math. Ninety-two percent of the physical 

science teachers have neither a major or a certification to teach 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
48 

physical science. So that is—you know, that is a big part of it. As 

Mr. Hall points out, we also use the University of Texas’s well-documented success in curriculum in trying to do this, also. 

So that is the thrust of it. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, as you know, Mr. Chairman, I have— I support the concept of scholarships in exchange for service, which 

I consider to be a twofer and something that would be very justifiable. And I am likely to support this legislation. 

However, let me just note that providing scholarships is, in reality, another form of remuneration. I mean, this is what—this is 

another form of providing a benefit for someone in order to pay 

them for a service. And of course, I have tried to put that to work 

here for the Federal Government, NASA and others, saying that 

they can have scholarship programs providing for young people 

who will then work for NASA or that government agency. 

But in this case, when we are talking about public education, let 

us remember that as we provide this remuneration for science and 

math teachers, it is because we are having to do this and the shortage that exists, exists because of policies by the education establishment that all teachers, no matter what they are teaching, have 

to make the same pay. And overnight, this problem in our country 

could be solved if we simply stepped back from this policy and the 

political people in this country did not support this nonsensical theory that someone who is teaching gymnastics in sixth grade has to 

earn as much as a sixth grade science teacher or basket weaving 

or home economics or whatever that is, that there are a lot of classes that can be taught, there are a lot of people waiting to teach social sciences in these schools, like history and other things, which, 

by the way, have a value to them. But right now, we have a shortage, and we are not permitted to pay mathematics and science 

teachers more money, and that is why we have this shortage. 

Now we are making up for that. This is—and I will likely, as I 

say, support the bill. But let us not forget that the fundamental 

problem is being caused by a nonsensical policy that should be 

changed at the local level. 

And that is what I have to say about it. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. I have heard 

your basket-weaving speech before. We don’t have jurisdiction on 

that in this committee, but we—this is a, for lack of a better term, 

I think, a back-door way to approach it. The five years is important, because half of teachers drop out in the first five years, and 

so there will be a mentoring program, also, to keep them there. 

But thanks for your good comment. 

Is—does anyone else like to be recognized? 

Ms. Hooley. 

Ms. HOOLEY.—very—oops. Thank you for turning on my mike. 

Briefly, in support of this legislation, as a former teacher and 

also watching my children go through high school and how difficult 

it was to find, particularly math, teachers in the high school level, 

people that were willing to teach math. This has been a problem 

for a long time, and as we know, the Augustine report says that 

this is an important thing to do. 

So I think we have to do this where we just have to increase that 

talent pool by improving K–12 science and math education. If we 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
49 

are going to maintain our front in innovation and technology, we 

have to get more students interested in the STEM fields. 

Our Nation’s economic vitality is derived, in a large part, from 

productivity of well-trained people and the steady stream of scientific and technical innovations they produce. 

After years of inattention and neglect, this legislation is a critical 

first step towards reinvestment in our nation’s STEM education. It 

will, in turn, positively benefit the American Competitiveness Initiative. 

And once again, I applaud the Chairman for his leadership on 

this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support it. 

Thank you. Thanks for your hard work. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you. I didn’t realize you were a teacher. What subject? 

Ms. HOOLEY. I taught high school, and I taught music, teaching—I mean reading, physical education, science, health——

Chairman GORDON. Okay. 

Ms. HOOLEY. I was at a small school. 

Chairman GORDON. You were a renaissance teacher. 

Ms. HOOLEY. And I couldn’t decide what I wanted to do when I 

grew up. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Bilbray is recognized for five minutes. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

I—you know, first of all, let me make a comment that Mr. Rohrabacher and I don’t agree on a lot of things, but I think, in all fairness, even though it is not our committee—— Chairman GORDON. A lot of folks don’t agree with Dana on a lot 

of things. 

Mr. BILBRAY. Dana and my disagreements usually happen when 

we are out surfing, but that is a different story. 

But I mean, we shouldn’t just pass over his statement about the 

fact that the educational institutions have a—government has a 

quasi-monopoly on this range to such—you know, the monopoly is 

so large that there is an impact on this idea. And his concept of 

us at least raising the issue, and we should raise it to our friends 

that are in the teachers associations and stuff about the fact that 

this one-size-fits-all salary just does not reflect the reality out 

there, and they have got to rethink. And I think that we should 

be the voices and the willingness to raise this, Democrats or Republicans. 

So I think he gets—I think he, really, has said a good point that 

none of us want to talk about or think about, and I think if we 

really care about this issue, we at least have got to be willing to 

broach that and raise that issue. And I—that is a huge leap, I understand. 

But going back to the original bill, one of the opportunities, I 

think, we have missed from—learning from history is a great, great 

contribution that the GI bill made, not just to the veterans but to 

the educational institutions, because they were taking people that 

were coming out of a real-world experience, not just walking out of 

educational institutions, and bringing that experience into the 

classroom with their degree to be able to teach. And I would really 

love to see us really understand and work with the Veterans Committee, which I happen to serve on, that—looking at a GI bill that 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
50 

really encourages our veterans to go back into education and then 

stay in education and get back in and teach our kids, because I just 

think the benefit of education, of having people that have not just 

spent their whole life in a—in the educational environs. It really, 

really can be reflected in the successes that we had in the past, especially during the 1960s and that period. 

So I would—I will support the bill, but I would just ask all of 

us to look at ways, as we talk about taking care of the veterans 

that are coming back from this conflict, one way they can—we can 

serve them and serve our children of the future is to try to have—

formulate a strategy to get them involved in the educational institutions. 

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Bilbray, as we deal with other competitiveness issues and these types of issues later in this Congress, 

when appropriate, we would welcome for you and Dana or anyone 

else to—if you want to bring a witness to be a part of a panel to 

discuss a disparity in salaries, we would welcome you participating 

in that way. 

Mr. BILBRAY. And, Mr. Chairman, let me clarify. I actually, you 

know, studied and wanted to be a history teacher, but I couldn’t 

pull the academics, so I ended up getting stuck in Congress instead. 

Chairman GORDON. All right. Well, you are in good company. 

Mr. McNerney is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, the Ranking Member and all of the staff, for putting together this bill. 

Education is dear to me. I have a Ph.D. in math, and I have to 

say that those are some of the finest years of my life studying 

mathematics and enjoying the beauty of it. 

And what I would like to do is see that more young people appreciate not only the power and effectiveness of mathematics, but 

also—and science, but also the beauty and the power that this 

brings to your life. 

Education is, really, an investment in our future, and education—the investment we put into education is paid back ten-fold 

by the contributions that individuals that are highly educated and 

appreciate that education contribute back to society. So it is not 

just something that we remunerate. It is something that we invest. 

It is something that we get paid back for. 

And it is also a responsibility, because as we look at the educational performance of our children and we see that they are falling behind and that there are countries out there that are putting 

out this investment on their children, and—they are going to be 

outperforming us in the future, as I know we are all aware of. I 

did make an effort to finish the ‘‘Rising Above the Gathering 

Storm,’’ and I am really only about a third or halfway through it, 

but I certainly see the need. 

And I urge all Members to support this bill. It is very important 

to our nation. It is very important to our future. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Gingrey is recognized. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
51 

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I got here so early this 

morning I just felt like I had to say a word or two. 

But in regard to the comments on my side over here, Mr. Rohrabacher and Mr. Bilbray, I think they bring up a good point. 

But the purpose of the bill—and I would say that we really need 

to do both. I think we need to do exactly what Dana had suggested. 

But in regard to this bill, I think what we need to keep in mind 

is we are trying to ‘‘rise above the gathering storm,’’ Mr. Chairman, 

as you pointed out. And it is not just a matter of trying to improve 

math and science engineering education and giving teachers an opportunity, incentivize them to do that and to go back into the classroom, but the purpose is to excite our young students at the K–12 

level to go on and pursue a career themselves in math and science 

and engineering. They, themselves, likely, might not go into teaching, but they go into industry and innovation and help this country 

‘‘rise above the gathering storm.’’ So that is what it is all about. 

And I—Mr. Chairman, I commend you for it. It is a great bill, 

and I am fully supportive, and I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Gingrey. 

And let me also point out that the purpose of the—as you said, 

the purpose of the bill is to get those teachers that know their subjects so they can inspire kids. But it is not just to create a few Dr. 

Ehlers, you know, or in terms of real top-notch, investigative scientists. It is so that those folks getting out of high school can work 

at a higher level and get a better job and understand what is going 

on. I mean, that is what 95 percent of this is just helping everyday 

people be able to work more productively and get a better job. 

Anyone——

Mr. BAIRD. I just would echo that, Mr. Chairman. 

I had a series of hearings—actually meetings in my district two 

weeks ago with members of the National Science Foundation, the 

Superintendent of Public Instruction, and I think the gentleman 

from California made excellent points about this, about the need 

for pay differentials. 

But your point about making sure people can get jobs, I spoke 

with a major employer, prepared to invest a couple hundred million 

dollars in my community, bring 200 new jobs, but they lack the 

ability to find people who could just add positive and negative 

numbers, do a scatter plot, calculate an average, understand what 

a standard deviation meant. That rudimentary knowledge was potentially costing us $200 million of investment and 200 new jobs. 

And it wasn’t that that investment wasn’t going to go somewhere. 

It was going to go somewhere. Those jobs were going to go somewhere. The question was, would they be in America or overseas. If 

we can’t answer the question affirmatively that we have the human 

resources who are educated to do this kind of basic work, we will 

lose the jobs, and we will lose our competitiveness. 

And I applaud you for your leadership. I can tell you, the people 

back home who employ students who graduated without adequate 

understanding of science and math applaud you as well. They are 

grateful to see this, that, on a bipartisan effort, we are coming together to solve this problem, and I celebrate your work. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Baird. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
52 

Let me—again, let me say that all I did was plagiarize this report, and I think most all of you are co-sponsors of this, so you 

know, you are as much responsible as I am, and everybody should 

go home and take credit for this. 

Mr. BAIRD. Are we called ‘‘plagiarizers’’ as well? That didn’t work 

for Senator Biden a few years ago. I——

Chairman GORDON. We are acknowledging it. 

Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Just a few comments to follow-up the earlier comments. 

But first of all, it is—none of us are planning to run for President, and so I think we can get by with plagiarizing. 

Secondly, I was somewhat relieved when Ms. Hooley was giving 

the list of the things she taught that she didn’t come up to basket 

weaving, or we might have had a little problem here. 

I also want to thank Dr. McNerney for his comments, because 

what we really want to do in the math and science instruction is 

to have the students reach the point that he was talking about, 

where—the subject of the intrinsic beauty of mathematics and 

science becomes apparent to the student, and that is when they 

really begin enjoying it and start to consider it as a career. And it 

takes a uniquely-qualified teacher to be able to bring that forward 

and to share that experience with the students. And that is what 

we are all about here, trying to develop good teachers. And once 

they reach that point where they can share that beauty with the 

kids and enjoy it themselves, they are likely to stay in the teaching 

profession. 

And in regard to the comments of Mr. Rohrabacher, I have argued for years in my speeches that there should be a pay differential for math and science teachers, and perhaps for some others. I 

fail to understand why the largest—one of the largest institutions 

in our society should be expected to deviate from the norms of our 

society, which is free enterprise and entrepreneurship and payment 

according to ability and what one brings to the job. We are—our 

entire economy is based on that precept, and yet, we get into the 

schools, everyone is supposed to be paid the same. And part of it 

is simply because the math and science teachers are badly outnumbered by the other teachers, and so you go with the crowd in 

a situation like that. And the easiest way is to pay everyone the 

same: no differentiation, no merit. And as a result, the good people 

tend to leave. The math and science teachers tend to leave because 

they can get a much higher salary. I think it is essential that we 

develop a different approach to the payment of teachers if we want 

to keep these teachers. The retention figures are horrendous, as the 

Chairman well knows, and especially the retention figures are horrendous for math and science teachers. And we simply have to 

change that. You have to meet the market in today’s world, and 

that is what we have to do in the schools. 

So thank you for bringing this bill forward, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. I am happy to be a co-sponsor, and I can’t wait to see 

the results of it. 

Thank you. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
53 

Do you think we should extend that hearing to whether Members 

of Congress should be paid the same? 

Mr. EHLERS. Well, since most of us didn’t come here for the 

money, it is probably not a factor. But I think pay differential 

would be good. 

Chairman GORDON. Okay. 

I understand that we are going to have—unfortunately, have 

votes about 10:45, and so we do want to try to—Ms. Woolsey. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Very quickly. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this good legislation, and of 

course, I support it, but as the mother of ‘‘Go Girl’’ legislation to 

encourage young girls and young women and their families to 

put—keep them in math, science, and technology when they are so 

good at it in the young ages, I believe now that it is beyond just 

girls. I mean, we can’t leave out just 50 percent of our population 

and expect to catch up with the rest of the world at all and not 

have a flat economy and a flat world. But I believe this goes beyond ‘‘Go Girl.’’ It goes in the right direction, and I am totally supportive of it. 

Thank you. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. 

And if I might, unless something is just burning at you, I would 

suggest that we try to move forward with this markup so that we—

so that it doesn’t inconvenience you to have to come back. 

Is there—do you want to say how it is going to affect Arizona? 

We will deal with that in a moment. Okay. 

I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as read and 

open to amendments at any point and that Members proceed with 

the amendments in the order of the roster. Without objection, so 

ordered. 

The first amendment on the roster is the Chair’s amendment offered in the nature of a substitute. I ask unanimous consent that 

the amendment be—in the nature of a substitute be treated as 

original text for purposes of the amendment under the Five-Minute 

Rule. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment in the nature of——

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. 

Without objection, no offense, so ordered. 

The CLERK. None taken. 

Chairman GORDON. I recognize myself for five minutes to explain 

the substitute amendment. 

This amendment, which has been developed in a bipartisan manner, and which I authored with Ranking Member Hall, incorporates 

several small improvements to the original bill. The main changes 

make the following—and let me—I am going to summarize this 

very quickly. 

Our Republican friends, as well as different folks in outside 

groups, came to us with suggestions, things like the Noyce Scholarship should be—have a five-year period rather than a four-year period. Basically, we have a number of these small, little changes. I 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
54 

will be happy to go over them in more—if anybody would like to, 

but it has been well-vetted by the minority. 

So if there are no specific changes, then I will say, is there any 

further discussion to the amendment? 

Mr. Hall. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I just, once again, want to thank you 

and your staff for working with our staff to improve the underlying 

bill. 

I yield back to you. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Hall. 

The second amendment on the roster is offered by the gentlelady 

from Texas, Ms. Johnson. 

Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Yes. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will——

The CLERK. Amendment offered by——

Chairman GORDON. Once again, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I thank 

the Committee for considering this important legislation. 

This amendment incorporates an important policy objective originating from my dear friend and colleague. And Dr. Ehlers joins me 

in co-sponsoring. He is not a Member of this committee, however 

he has offered this several times. 

This provision is called the PALS Act, which stands for Partnerships for Access to Laboratory Sciences. And it exists independently as H.R. 524. It is supported by the American Chemical Society, National Science Teachers Association, and others. It would 

award grants to partnerships that have a high-needs school or college or university or a business or a non-profit organization to—the 

grant is to be used for teacher enhancement, laboratory equipment, 

curriculum development, and other elements to give high-needs 

schools what they need to lessen the achievement disparities that 

currently exist. 

As a witness at the March 8 Subcommittee hearing, there was 

testimony saying there are many schools in this Nation that don’t 

have science labs, and many schools don’t have teachers whose 

backgrounds are strong enough to do their jobs well. Dallas, Texas 

has quite a high-needs school, but we also have shining examples 

of successful partnerships. One of the best high schools in the Nation is located in a high-need area. The science and engineering 

magnet has its own electron microscope for student research and 

fully-equipped engineering and robotic labs capable of college-level 

experiments. 

In 1999, Texas Instruments, working with engineering professors 

at Southern Methodist University, helped design the first high 

school engineering course in the Nation that incorporates the fundamentals of digital signal processing in at the science and engineering magnet in the Dallas Public School system. The partnership with TI enables students to see firsthand how science, math, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
55 

and technology come together to create cool products like Sony 

music chips. The project has been expanded and demonstrates impressive results in keeping students interested in technology careers. There are many other good things to say about them. It was 

listed as the number one public high school by several magazines 

last year. And TI has just been phenomenal in its support. 

So I request permission to submit this additional information to 

the record and ask for the adoption of this amendment. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the Committee for considering an amendment offered jointly by me and by Dr. Ehlers, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee 

on Research and Science Education. 

This amendment incorporates an important policy objective originating from my 

dear friend and colleague, Mr. Ruben Hinojosa, who is not a Member of this committee. The provision is called the PALS Act, which stands for ‘‘Partnerships for Access to Laboratory Sciences.’’ The PALS Act exists independently as H.R. 524. 

Supported by the American Chemical Society, the National Science Teachers Association and others, the PALS program would award grants to partnerships that 

include: 

• a high need school 

• a college or university, and 

• a business or nonprofit organization. 

The grant monies are to be used for teacher enrichment, laboratory equipment, 

curriculum development and other elements to give high-need schools what they 

need to lessen the achievement disparities that currently exist. 

As witnesses at the March 8th Subcommittee hearing testified, there are many 

schools in this nation who don’t have science labs. Many schools don’t have teachers 

whose backgrounds are strong enough to do their jobs well. 

Dallas, Texas, has quite a few high-need schools. But we also have shining examples of successful partnerships. 

Townview is one of the best high schools in the Nation—and it is located in a 

high-need area. The Townview Science and Engineering Magnet School has its own 

electron microscope for student research and fully equipped engineering and robotics 

labs capable of college level experiments. 

In 1999, Texas Instruments, working with engineering professors at Southern 

Methodist University, helped design the first high school engineering course in the 

Nation that incorporates the fundamentals of digital signal processing at Townview 

Science and Engineering Magnet in the Dallas Public School system. 

The partnership between T.I. and Townview enabled students to see first-hand 

how science, math and technology come together to create cool products, like Sony 

Music clips. The project has been expanded and demonstrates impressive results in 

keeping students interested in technology careers. 

There are many other good things to say about Townview. . .and T.I., and I request permission to submit this additional information into the Record, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to note to the Committee that the PALS provision was, unfortunately, reduced to a ‘‘demonstration grant,’’ rather than the full-scale initiative originally intended by Mr. Hinojosa. 

However, one advantage is that it gives NSF greater freedom to implement the 

pilot program and an opportunity to evaluate what strategies work, and may be 

scaled-up later on. 

Dr. Ehlers has been a strong partner in our efforts to lessen the achievement gap 

in our nation’s high-need schools. I thank him for his advocacy and collaboration. 

Dr. Ehlers and I aim to try to address the disparity issue with Mr. Hinojosa’s provision today. I want thank all of the staff who spent time negotiating the provisions 

of this amendment, especially those representing Hinojosa, Gordon, Hall, Ehlers, 

and myself. Thanks also to Subcommittee Chairman Baird for his tireless support 

on the high-needs schools and disparities issues. 

Finally, I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for consideration of this 

amendment and urge my colleagues to support it. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
56 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Without objection, so ordered. 

Dr. Ehlers, you were a major part of this amendment. Would you 

like to say amen? 

Mr. EHLERS. Yes. Amen. 

If I may, I would like to say a little more, although, since you 

are concerned about the time——

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Ehlers, I have been informed that the 

vote is pushed back a little bit later than 10:45, so please—you——

Mr. EHLERS. All right. So I will ask unanimous consent for the 

majority—my statement to be entered into the record, and I will 

try to summarize it. 

This is a bill that I worked on and introduced last year, and we 

are pleased to see it incorporated into this section. 

One hundred and fifty years ago, this bill would not have been 

necessary, perhaps not even a hundred years ago, because most everyone lived on the farm, and on the farm you learn some basic 

ideas of mechanics and science. 

But in today’s world, we need laboratory science in the schools. 

Children have to have that experience. I personally think they 

should have it at every grade level from pre-school through grad 

school. 

This bill is an attempt to introduce lab science in the high 

schools, make certain that every student has an opportunity to experience laboratory science, to actually sit and do experiments with 

real equipment on real objects, and that is essential to their experience if they are going to continue in science and to thoroughly 

learn science. 

One other point I would mention, recent research by Carl 

Wieman, who has testified before this committee a number of 

times, is a Nobel Prize winner from the University of Colorado, and 

he has done extensive research in this and is finding that simulations can also be a very effective way of teaching laboratory experience. So that is something I hope the National Science Foundation 

could pursue as well. 

But this bill will give teachers training and professional development on how to use laboratories, how to teach laboratories properly, and will provide some funding for—particularly in schools 

without the means to have laboratories. 

So I unanimously request the rest of the statement be entered 

into the record, and I strongly support this amendment. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

I am very pleased that, early in this session, my colleagues, Representative 

Hinojosa and Representative Johnson, introduced a bill to improve high school laboratory science, particularly for those in highest need. This amendment is essentially that bill with some small changes. 

Last year the National Research Council’s report on the state of high school laboratory science made it very clear that if U.S. high schoolers today are lucky enough 

to have any laboratory experience it is probably not a very good one. Furthermore, 

many students start college with no laboratory experience and are subsequently less 

likely to pursue science degrees. The report also established that there is very little 

research on the subject of successful laboratories. It is my hope that these pilot 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
57 

projects will help to add to the research available to schools interested in adding 

or improving laboratory science. 

I want to thank my colleagues for including in this amendment a requirement for 

professional development to be a part of every high school laboratory grant. The Research and Science Education Subcommittee heard from witnesses two weeks ago 

who emphasized—as this committee has frequently heard—the importance of a welltrained teacher. It is my belief that any high school laboratory will only be successful if the teacher is given special training to teach laboratory science. 

I believe the intent of this amendment meshes well with the goals of the Chair- man’s bill (H.R. 362) and I am pleased to support both. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. You are a great value 

added to this committee. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

Mr. Hall is recognized. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. 

I recognize the hard work that Mrs. Johnson and Dr. Ehlers have 

made in an area where NSF has real expertise to prioritize the— I would have preferred to have seen statutory language prohibiting 

federal funding from being used for the purchase of lab equipment 

and the maintenance of lab facilities in this amendment. However, 

I appreciate the willingness of you to work with us and the majority to work with us to ensure that report language is strongly 

worded to emphasize that it is the Committee’s intent for the nonfederal partners to provide the funding for equipment and facility 

maintenance and improvements. 

So I think that is something that would be very helpful. 

I yield back my time. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Hall, you certainly have our commitment 

on that. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The amendment is agreed to. 

The third amendment on the roster is also offered by the 

gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Johnson. Are you ready to proceed with 

your amendment? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Yes. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment offered—— Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The amendment I am offering today——

Chairman GORDON. The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. Excuse me. 

Ms. JOHNSON. The amendment I am offering today deals with 

Section 205 of H.R. 362. The section addresses the STEM Talent 

Expansion Program, called the STEP program. STEP aims to encourage colleges and universities to increase the number of STEM 

graduates at the higher-education level, particularly under-represented minorities. Grant funds may be used to promote interdisciplinary teaching, undergraduate research and mentoring initiatives, bridge programs to help students at community colleges 

transfer credits into the program, and other important projects. 

The law is currently written so that NSF must ‘‘strive to increase 

the numbers of STEM graduates who are women, minorities, and 

individuals with disabilities.’’ This program is important, because 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
58 

I live right in the midst of a number of needs. The majority of my 

constituents in Dallas are under-represented in STEM fields. 

Twenty percent of the public school student body have access to the 

school I just spoke of, but eighty percent do not, and they need encouragement to make it through in an education system filled with 

obstacles, no pipeline, and little hope. And my amendment would 

make a small addition to the text of Section 205 that would make 

a big difference to me and my constituents. And it states that in 

awarding grants for this program, the NSF Director shall endeavor 

to ensure that a wide variety of science, technology, engineering, 

and mathematic fields and types of institutions of higher education, 

including two-year colleges, are covered. My amendment changes 

the language to say ‘‘including two-year colleges and minority-serving institutions.’’ Minority-serving institutions are historically 

black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, tribal 

colleges and universities, and institutions that serve Asian American and Pacific Islanders and persons with disabilities. Hometown 

examples of a Texas college that Mr. Hall has served on the Board, 

the Texas Southern University, Laredo College, and there are probably over 50 minority-serving institutions in Texas alone. My 

amendment calls greater attention to the minority-serving institutions in an effort to give them a fair chance to apply for a STEP 

grant. 

As I said, Mr. Chairman, this is a small change, and I encourage 

my colleagues to support this provision aimed at diversifying a 

highly-skilled STEM workforce. 

And I might also add, Mr. Chairman, that that is one of the reasons why I agree with Mr. Rohrabacher, because we have—most of 

our teachers do not have a major in the subjects in which they 

teach. That does not speak well for the areas that we have the 

greatest need. 

I thank you very much, and I hope I will get support for this 

amendment. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The amendment I am offering today deals with Section 205 of H.R. 362, the Section addressing the STEM Talent Expansion Program, called the STEP program. 

STEP aims to encourage colleges and universities to increase the number of 

STEM graduates at the higher education level, particularly under-represented minorities. 

GRANT FUNDS MAY BE USED TO PROMOTE

• interdisciplinary teaching, 

• undergraduate research, 

• mentoring initiatives, 

• bridge programs to help students at community colleges transfer credits into 

Bachelor’s programs, 

• and other important projects. 

The law is currently written so that NSF must, quote, ‘‘strive to increase,’’ the 

numbers of STEM graduates who are women, minorities, and individuals with disabilities. 

This program is important to me. The majority of my constituents in Dallas are 

under-represented in STEM fields, and they need encouragement to make it through 

an education system filled with obstacles, no pipeline, and little hope. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
59 

My amendment would make a small addition to the text in Section 205 that 

would make a big difference to me and my constituents. 

Section 205 states that, ‘‘in awarding grants for this program, the NSF Director 

shall endeavor to ensure that a wide variety of science, technology, engineering and 

mathematics fields and types of institutions of higher education, including two-year 

colleges, are covered.’’

My amendment changes the language to say, ‘‘including two-year colleges and minority-serving institutions.’’

‘‘MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS’’ ARE

• Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 

• Hispanic Serving Institutions, 

• Tribal Colleges and Universities, and 

• institutions that serve Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and persons 

with disabilities. 

Hometown examples are Paul Quinn College in Dallas; Texas Southern University 

in Houston; Laredo College. . .there are nearly 50 MSIs in Texas alone. 

My amendment calls greater attention to MSIs in an effort to give them a fair 

chance to apply for a STEP grant. 

As I said, Mr. Chairman, this is a small change, and I encourage my colleagues 

to support this provision aimed at diversifying our highly-skilled STEM workforce. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Would anyone else like to be recognized on that amendment? 

If not, I want to recognize myself for just a moment. 

You know, I think that every Member of Congress brings different sets of experiences to Congress, and because of that, we are 

able to make better decisions and those life skills. I think any type 

of group can make better decisions when you have a diversity of 

backgrounds. And that is the reason, when we tried to put together 

our majority staff, that we reached out to minorities and to women, 

and I am telling you, it is—it was tough. We had a difficult time, 

and we did not do as good a job as I would have liked. And I think 

it is a real-world demonstration that, particularly within women 

and minorities, that that is the greatest area for potential that we 

have in terms of boosting up those folks that want to go into these 

areas. And I think this is a good amendment, and I commend the 

gentlelady for bringing it. 

And if there are no further discussions, then all in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, say no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is 

agreed to. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. 

Chairman GORDON. The fourth amendment on the roster is offered by the gentlelady from Arizona, Ms. Giffords. 

Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I do have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment, and I 

ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ranking Member Hall, for hearing this amendment. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
60 

We all sat here just a couple weeks ago to hear from Norm Augustine and members of the panel that spoke about the ‘‘Rising 

Above the Gathering Storm’’ and the problems that we face. 

The National Science Foundation’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program seeks to increase the number of students that are going to be receiving associate degrees, baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, and certificates in STEM fields. 

NSF provides grants to institutions of higher education to support certain activities, such as student mentoring, interdisciplinary 

teaching, undergraduate research, and internships in order to 

achieve the program’s goal. 

What I am offering today, Mr. Chairman, is to amend the STEM 

Talent Expansion Program. The current statute requires NSF to 

strive to increase the number of STEM graduates among women 

and minorities who are currently under-represented in those fields, 

and I think we would all agree that that is important. 

But what this amendment specifies is that NSF should also 

strive to increase the number of STEM graduates among students 

in secondary schools with high concentrations of children from lowincome families. And the purpose of this, Mr. Chairman, Ranking 

Member Hall, is to help increase participation in STEM fields of 

students in poor and rural areas and urban regions. 

The authors of the ‘‘Gathering Storm’’ report stated that they are 

worried about the future prosperity of the United States, and I believe they meant the entire United States, not just certain areas. 

So we must increase our number of STEM professionals across the 

entire country. 

They go on to write that half of undergraduate students who 

enter college, intending to earn a science or engineering major, actually completed a major, as you so—spoke earlier , Mr. Chairman, 

in one of those fields. Many of those students could have succeeded 

if they were given enough support in the early days of their undergraduate experience. 

So it is clear, to me, that we have to do more to help students 

who graduate from schools in poor, rural, or urban areas of our 

country, and the STEM Talent Expansion Program can do just 

that. 

I think we all take seriously the challenges that we have before 

us as we try to lead in the 21st century. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Hall, my amendment 

will help students from low-income, rural, and urban areas get the 

support that they need as well to help pursue an education and a 

career in science, mathematics, technology and engineering. 

And I request the support from Members on both sides of the 

aisle. 

So thank you. 

[The prepared statement by Ms. Giffords follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE GIFFORDS

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

The National Science Foundation’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program seeks to increase the number of students receivVerDate Aug 31 2005 23:13 Apr 17, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR085.XXX HR085

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
61 

ing associate or baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, and certificates in STEM 

fields. 

NSF provides grants to institutions of higher education to support activities, such 

as student mentoring, interdisciplinary teaching, undergraduate research, and internships in order to achieve the program’s goal. 

What I am offering would amend the STEM Talent Expansion Program. 

Current statute requires NSF to strive to increase the number of STEM graduates 

among women and minorities who are currently under-represented in those fields. 

My amendment specifies that NSF should also strive to increase the number of 

STEM graduates among students from secondary schools with high concentrations 

of children from low-income families. 

My purpose in doing this is to help increase participation in STEM fields of students from poor rural and urban regions. 

The authors of the Gathering Storm report stated that they are ‘‘worried about 

the future prosperity of the United States’’ and that we must increase our number 

of STEM professionals. 

They go on to write that fewer than half of undergraduate students who entered 

college intending to earn a science or engineering major actually completed a degree 

in one of those subjects. Many of these students could have ‘‘succeeded if they were 

given enough support in the early days of their undergraduate experience.’’

It is clear that we must do more to help students who graduated from schools in 

poor rural and urban areas, and the STEM Talent Expansion Program can do just 

that. 

I take this challenge very seriously, and I want to do my part to ensure that we 

in the United States continue to lead in the 21st century. 

Dr. Sue Adams, a Professor in the Math Department at the University of Arizona 

told me that ‘‘our students from poor urban and rural schools must be given the 

support needed to be successful. Anything less is unacceptable. . .. It is these skills 

that will arm students with the necessary tools to address the challenges of the rapidly changing technological society.’’

My amendment will help students from low-income rural and urban areas get the 

support they need to pursue an education and a career in science, math, technology, 

and engineering. 

Chairman GORDON. Are there further discussions for this good 

amendment? 

If not, then all in favor, say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. 

The amendment is agreed to. 

The fifth amendment of the roster is offered by the gentlelady 

from Arizona. 

Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I do have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. I ask 

unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Ranking Member Hall. 

What I am offering here is an amendment to the provision of 

H.R. 362 that authorizes NSF to support summer teacher institutes. It requires NSF to give priority to grant applications that 

propose programs that will attract teachers to the summer institutes from high-need school systems, that is schools that have a 

high concentration of children from low-income families that are—

currently experience a shortage of highly-qualified teachers. 

During this—doing this will help train teachers from poor, rural, 

and urban areas to teach challenging courses in math and science, 

including AP and IB courses. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
62 

Let me give you an example, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Hall. 

I want—I have to talk about Arizona. 

I had an education summit out in Cochise County. My district is 

over 9,000 square miles. Most people recognize the City of Tucson, 

but there are many other smaller cities in my district, including a 

town called Bisbee, which used to be the big mining capital of Arizona, and, certainly, of the west. 

We had a—one of the top five teachers in the state that came 

from Bisbee to testify about the fact that her top student that went 

on to the University of Arizona was told the first week of classes 

that they would be skipping the first two chapters because they 

had received that in their AP biology course in high school. And 

she came before us and she said, ‘‘We failed our student,’’ because 

this student said to the teacher, ‘‘I don’t know what AP is.’’ The 

fact that in these rural areas they don’t have the teachers that are 

qualified to be teaching these AP courses is something, Mr. Chairman, I think, that we are all concerned about. 

The ‘‘Gathering Storm’’ report states that without fundamental 

knowledge and skills, the majority of students scoring below certain levels that we see around the country is going to provide for 

the lack of foundation for good jobs and participation across society. 

We know that low-income students, 70 percent of their middle 

school math teachers majored in a subject other than math in colleges you so—spoke about, and these numbers are staggering. 

So again, getting back to the ‘‘Gathering Storm’’ report, it says 

very bluntly, and I think we take it seriously, accelerated math and 

science courses are less frequently offered in rural and city schools 

than in suburban ones. How to achieve an equitable distribution of 

funding and high-quality teaching should be a top priority issue for 

the United States. 

My amendment, Mr. Chairman, addresses this head on. To remain competitive, we have to address all of the states and all of 

the areas in our country, and I respectfully ask for support for my 

amendment. 

[The prepared statement by Ms. Giffords follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE GIFFORDS

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

What I am offering amends the provision in H.R. 362 that authorizes NSF to support summer teacher institutes. 

It requires NSF to give priority to grant applications that propose programs that 

will attract teachers to the summer institutes from high-need school systems—that 

is, schools that have a high concentration of children from low income families and 

that are experiencing a shortage of highly qualified teachers. 

Doing this will help train teachers from poor rural and urban regions to teach 

challenging courses in math and science, including AP and IB courses. 

As the results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 

showed us, we must do much more to ensure that our students are learning math 

and science. Only 36 percent of fourth graders and 30 percent of eighth graders performed at or above the ‘‘proficient’’ level in math. Only 29 percent of fourth graders, 

32 percent of 8th graders, and 18 percent of 12th graders performed at or above the 

‘‘proficient’’ level in science. 

The Gathering Storm report states that ‘‘without fundamental knowledge and 

skills, the majority of students scoring below this level—particularly those below the 

‘‘basic’’ level—lack the foundation for good jobs and full participation in society.’’


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
63 

One of the main reasons for this situation in many of our poor rural and urban 

schools is the lack of math and science content knowledge of our classroom teachers. 

Most of these same teachers work extremely hard and do their best to teach their 

students. Too many, however, simply do not have an academic background in math 

and science. 

For low-income students, 70 percent of their middle school math teachers majored 

in a subject other than math in college. The numbers are truly staggering. 

Karen Nicodemus is President of Cochise College, which is in a part of my district 

that many would consider the Wild West with towns like Tombstone, stated that, 

‘‘Although the shortage of highly qualified math and science teachers cuts across all 

education sectors, we should not lose sight of the fact that in rural districts, especially those serving low-income families, the shortage is even more acute and problematic. To engage more students in pursing STEM opportunities, we have to provide teachers with professional development opportunities that will translate into 

challenging and exciting lessons for our students at all levels. . .. We do a disservice to our brightest high school students, when small, rural schools lack the resources. . .to provide Advanced Placement or higher level math and science classes.’’

Indeed, the Gathering Storm report says bluntly that ‘‘accelerated math and 

science courses are less frequently offered in rural and city schools than in suburban 

ones. How to achieve an equitable distribution of funding and high-quality teaching 

should be a top-priority issue for the United States.’’ My amendment addresses this challenge head on. It will provide more opportunities for math and science teachers in our most challenging schools in rural and 

urban areas to get the professional development and training they need. Our children will benefit tremendously. 

To remain competitive in our 21st century global economy, it is critical that we 

reform math and science education in America. All children, especially those in our 

rural and urban schools, should have the opportunity to become leaders in science 

and engineering. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Ms. Giffords, for your value 

added. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed 

to. 

Are there other amendments? 

Mr. AKIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment, and I 

ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

The gentleman from Missouri is recognized for five minutes to 

explain his amendment. 

Mr. AKIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

One of the things, as a guy that has grown up in engineering, 

I at least have a little bit of understanding of, and that is how fast 

science and technology moves in our world, how that field is continuously changing and tremendously dynamic. And I thank you, 

Mr. Chairman, for the excellent bill that you have going here, and 

I am very supportive of the section. It is Section 204, which says 

we are going to take a look at the good materials that can be found 

and used and distributed to help get kids going in math and 

science. 

One thing that would scare me would be if we got to the point, 

from a government point of view, that we start to freeze everything 

and say, ‘‘Well, you have got to do it this, that, or the other way.’’

My amendment simply says that the recommendations made under 

this section is not going to be considered some mandate for it has 

to be done just in a certain way. I think that was implied in the 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
64 

way it is written. I am very supportive of it, and I really thank the 

majority party for working with me on this amendment. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Again, thank you, Mr. Akin, for your value 

added. 

Let me just point out that we have a better bill today, because 

it was vetted. The minority, outside, different various folks have 

made different recommendations, and we have tried to alter it for 

that. 

This amendment we just received minutes ago, and we—certainly, we want to accept the amendment, but it just makes 

everybody’s job easier to have recommendations earlier so they can 

be vetted. But again, this is a good amendment, and we will accept 

it. 

Is there anyone else? 

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Just to comment on this, and not to speak against 

the amendment, but just to clarify some of the issues. 

We have—we face a major problem in this nation, because the 

people and the children are very mobile, and there is one area that 

we should have a national standard, although I hate to use the 

word ‘‘standard,’’ but that is in the sequencing of topics, because 

math and science are sequential. And we—you get into a lot of 

problems because of the variety of math and science programs. 

Let me give you some examples. 

Suppose you have a student attending a school where fractions 

are taught in the fall and percentages are taught in the spring. In 

January, that student transfers because the family moves. He 

gets—ends up in another school that teaches percentages in the fall 

and fractions in the spring. That student is going to get a doubledose of fractions and will not learn percentages. 

Now there is much to be said for a national agreement. I hate 

to use the word ‘‘standard,’’ but a national agreement about the sequence in which subjects should be taught, so that any student can 

be assured, and parents can be assured, that whenever they move, 

their student will fit right into the same sequence, even though it 

may be taught from a different textbook. At least they will have 

the same sequence. 

And that is something that I am working on separately, perhaps 

through ‘‘No Child Left Behind,’’ but I just wanted to take this opportunity to say we do have a problem by not maintaining a national agreement on that, and we should attack that problem. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GORDON. Dr. Baird. 

Mr. BAIRD. I would like to echo Dr. Ehlers’ observation, and he 

and I have discussed this issue before. 

If you look at—if you read the ‘‘Rising Above the Gathering 

Storm,’’ they talk about at least exploring the possibility of a voluntary model national curriculum. If you look at many of the nations internationally who are exceeding our performance on math 

and science in later grades, they have, precisely, national curricula. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
65 

We are, as Dr. Ehlers said, a tremendously mobile society. I have 

school districts in my district that have 40 percent turnover— schools, rather, individual schools, 40 percent turnover every single 

year. So we look at AYPs and we look at ‘‘No Child Left Behind,’’ et cetera, you have got a school where 40 percent of the kids 

weren’t here last year, meaning they didn’t necessarily get the curriculum and sequence that the other kids got. And every time a 

new child arrives in a new school, that school has to somehow assess where that child should be. Those kids fall out of the sequence 

of the other kids. There is tremendous inefficiency, and they often 

feel stupid. They feel left behind. They lack—there is a great word. 

They lack propaedeutic knowledge. Propaedeutic knowledge is the 

knowledge that you must have before learning something else. And 

if you miss that, you fall off the pace line, and I don’t think we do 

those kids a service. And oftentimes, I think those kids are often 

kids, maybe from, perhaps, less stable families, lower-income families, possibly, who already have three strikes against them. And I 

don’t necessarily—because I don’t think it is the intent of the legislation before us today to establish a national curriculum. I don’t see 

this as, necessarily, a harmful amendment, but I would certainly 

not endorse this if it precluded this committee from discussing the 

pros and cons of some form of standardized sequence of instruction 

in the math and sciences so that kids who move across this country, as they do many times, can do so relatively seamlessly. There 

has got to be enormous expense to our hodgepodge approach to 

education in this country, an enormous inefficiency, and I think 

this committee, and possibly the other committees and jurisdiction 

might want to look at that. I know it is an—people who say, ‘‘Well, 

it is all about local control.’’ I am going to go out on a limb and 

suggest—I would guess 99.9 percent of the people who advocate 

against a national standard couldn’t name a single school board 

member in their local control jurisdiction nor could they tell you 

anything about the sequence of curricula. So we talk about local 

control as a—that nobody can raise any questions about, but I 

think if you look at the international competition, they have national curricula, and they follow through that. And I think we 

ought to at least discuss that. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Baird. 

I—counsel informs me that this is a very narrow amendment to 

a very narrow section, that it would not stop discussion or implementations of sequencing or, for that matter, for general agreement 

as to how to proceed in a uniform method. 

Mr. BAIRD. I respect that. And based on that, I certainly wouldn’t 

oppose it today, but I would urge this committee to raise this as 

a possible question for exploration, how—just how diverse are our 

courses across this country, how frequently do students move 

across educational jurisdictions, what are the costs and benefits of 

that, and might we not be able to do a better job of meeting those 

students’ needs? 

Chairman GORDON. Just like, to a great extent, our parents got 

one job and stayed there, our kids are in a much different situation. It is a much more mobile society, and those are very good 

points that are raised. 

Are there further discussions—yes, sir. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
66 

Mr. SMITH. I would like to just add, as an educator by training 

and a practitioner for a few years, that I understand the arguments being made. I also would like to suggest that there could be 

a scenario where a fourth grade class mastered fractions early on, 

and I would hate to see a class held back from excelling even further because they are tied to a timeline where the professionalism 

and very good judgment of a highly-trained educator is disregarded 

in trusting that judgment of whether or not to move ahead. You 

know. If there is a new student who moves in, I can understand 

that, and teachers are trained to accommodate that. So I think we 

should move cautiously when we look at these things, but certainly, 

I do support the amendment. 

Thank you. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Smith. 

Are there other—does anyone else have discussion? 

If not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, say no. The ayes have it. The amendment is agreed to. 

Are there other amendments to the amendment in the nature of 

a substitute? 

If there is not, the vote occurs on the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute. All in favor, say aye. All opposed, no. The ayes have 

it. The amendment is agreed to. 

The vote is on the bill, H.R. 362, as amended. All of those in 

favor will say aye. All those opposed will say no. Excuse me. All 

of those in favor, say aye. All of those opposed, no. The ayes have 

it. 

I recognize Mr. Hall to offer a motion. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I now move that the Committee favorably report H.R. 362, as amended, to the House with the recommendation that the bill, as amended, do pass. Furthermore, I 

move that the staff be instructed to prepare the legislative report 

and make necessary technical and conforming changes, and that 

the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill before the 

House for consideration. 

Chairman GORDON. The question is on the motion to report the 

bill favorably. Those in favor of the motion will signify by saying 

aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. The bill is favorably reported. 

Without objection, the motion is reconsidered—to reconsider is 

laid upon the table. And I move that Members have two subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental, minority, or 

additional views on the measure. I move pursuant to Clause 1 of 

Rule 22 of the Rules of the House of Representatives that the Committee authorize the Chairman to offer such motions as may be 

necessary in the House to adopt and pass H.R. 362, ‘‘10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds’’ Science and Math Scholarship Act, as 

amended. Without objection, so ordered. 

Let me say that this is—and I thank all of you for your cooperation—this is a high priority for the House leadership. And my understanding, this bill will be up either the first or second week 

after we return from the recess. And again, I hope all of you will 

take the credit you deserve. 

I want—let me, again, thank all you Members today. This has 

been another, I think, productive markup, bipartisan, non-partisan, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
67 

that I hope that everyone will go home and take credit for it, because you all deserve it. 

And I will see you on the Floor probably the first week that we 

come back. 

And the Committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:17 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
(69) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 362, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS, AMENDMENT ROSTER, 

H.R. 362 SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
70 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362a.eps
71 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362b.eps
72 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362c.eps
73 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362d.eps
74 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362e.eps
75 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362f.eps
76 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362g.eps
77 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362h.eps
78 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362i.eps
79 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362j.eps
80 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362k.eps
81 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362l.eps
82 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362m.eps
83 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362n.eps
84 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362o.eps
85 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362p.eps
86 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362q.eps
87 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362r.eps
88 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362s.eps
89 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362t.eps
90 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362u.eps
91 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362v.eps
92 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362w.eps
93 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362x.eps
94 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362y.eps
95 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362z.eps
96 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362aa.eps
97 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362bb.eps
98 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362cc.eps
99 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362dd.eps
100 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF

H.R. 362, ‘‘10,000 TEACHERS, 10 MILLION MINDS’’ SCIENCE AND MATH SCHOLARSHIP

ACT

Summary 

The bill implements most of the K–12 science education recommendations of the 

National Academies report, ‘‘Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future.’’ It establishes a teacher education 

program at the National Science Foundation (NSF) to encourage math, science, and 

engineering faculty to work with education faculty to improve the education of 

mathematics and science teachers and to provide scholarships to students in science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields who commit to become 

mathematics and science teachers at elementary and secondary schools; authorizes 

summer teacher training institutes at NSF and DOE to improve the content knowledge and pedagogical skills of in-service mathematics and science teachers, including preparing them to teach challenging course in science and math such as the Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses; requires that NSF include support for Master’s degree programs for in-service mathematics and science 

teachers within the NSF Math and Science Partnerships; and authorizes funding for 

the NSF STEM Talent Expansion program and expands the program to include centers for improving undergraduate STEM education. 

Sectional Summary of Bill 

Section 1 Table of contents. 

Section 2 Findings on the role of NSF in K–12 and undergraduate STEM 

education. 

Section 3 Definitions used in the bill. 

Title I—Science Scholarships 

Section 101 Short title of the bill. 

Section 102 Findings relating the bill to the National Academies report recommendations. 

Section 103 Policy objective of the bill—to increase by 10,000 annually the 

number of capable K–12 science and math teachers. 

Section 104 Amends the NSF Noyce Scholarship program, established by 

the NSF Authorization Act of 2002, to create incentives for colleges and universities to improve the training of STEM teachers and increases the size and duration of the scholarships 

provided for majors in STEM fields who pursue teaching credentials: 

• Provides competitive awards to institutions of higher education (or consortia 

of such institutions) that (1) establish cross-department faculty teams (STEM 

faculty along with education faculty) to develop courses of instruction leading 

to baccalaureate degrees in STEM fields and also preparing graduates to become certified or licensed to teach in a K–12 classroom, and (2) administer 

scholarships for students during their sophomore through senior years and 

summer internships during their freshman years. 

• Requires early field teaching experiences for student teachers in the program 

under the supervision of highly experienced and effective teachers. 

• Requires awardees to provide professional development and mentoring support to scholarship recipients, after matriculation. 

• Sets scholarship amounts at the cost of attendance at particular institutions, 

not to exceed $10,000 per year, and provides up to three years of scholarship 

support for any individual. 

• Requires scholarship recipients to commit to teaching for up to six years following graduation (the period of teaching commitment is based on the number of years of scholarship support), reduces the commitment by one year for 

individuals who teach at high-need schools, and converts the scholarships to 

loans if the teaching commitment is not met. 

• Authorizes the NSF to accept donations from the private sector to help support scholarships and internships. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
101 

• Authorizes $70 million for NSF for FY 2008, $101 million for FY 2009, $133 

million for FY 2010, $164 million for FY 2011, and $196 million for FY 2012. 

Title II—Mathematics and Science Education Improvement 

Section 201 amends the NSF Math and Science Education Partnerships 

program established by the NSF Authorization Act of 2002: 

• Authorizes the development of Master’s degree programs for in-service mathematics and science teachers. 

• Authorizes teacher training activities to prepare teachers to teach challenging 

courses in mathematics and science, including Advanced Placement and 

International Baccalaureate courses, and provides for mentoring by professional scientists, mathematicians, and engineers. 

Section 202 addresses teacher institute programs at NSF and DOE: 

• Directs NSF to establish a grant program to support summer or academic 

year teacher institutes and authorizes summer teacher institutes as a component of the NSF 21st Century program. Such summer institutes are required 

to include teacher training activities to prepare teachers to teach challenging 

courses in mathematics and science, including Advanced Placement and 

International Baccalaureate courses. 

• Authorizes $32 million for NSF for FY 2008, $35.2 million for FY 2009, and 

$38.7 million for FY 2010, $42.6 million for FY 2011, and $46.8 million for 

FY 2012. 

• The following amounts are authorized for the existing Laboratory Science 

Teacher Professional Development program at DOE: $3 million for FY 2008, 

$8 million for FY 2009, and $10 million for each year FY 2010 through FY 

2012. 

Section 203 requires NSF, under the Math and Science Partnership program, to develop and implement Master’s degree programs for in-service 

mathematics and science teachers, who attend on a part-time basis and 

who will be able to complete the degree requirements within three years. 

The programs have the following features: 

• Provide stipends to defray the cost of attendance for teachers in the program. 

• Allow for support for the development of the courses of instruction and related educational materials and equipment (offering of online learning is an 

option). 

• Require the distribution of awards among institutions of different sizes and 

geographic locations. 

Authorizes $46 million for NSF for FY 2008, $50.6 million for FY 2009, $55.7 million for FY 2010, $61.2 million for FY 2011, and $67.3 million for FY 2012. 

Section 204: (1) Establishes a national panel of experts to identify and collect K–

12 mathematics and science teaching materials that have been demonstrated to be 

effective and to recommend the development of new materials in areas where effective materials do not exist; and (2) directs NSF and the Department of Education 

to develop ways to disseminate effective materials and support efforts to develop 

new materials, in accordance with the recommendations of the national panel. 

Section 205 amends the NSF STEM Talent Expansion Program established 

under the NSF Authorization Act of 2002 to create centers for improvement 

of undergraduate education in STEM fields, including: 

• Centers for the development of undergraduate curriculum and teaching methods and for training faculty and teaching assistants in effective pedagogical 

practices. 

• Assessment of the effectiveness of the centers and dissemination of information about materials and methods developed. 

Authorizes $44 million for NSF for the STEM Talent Expansion program for FY 

2008, of which $4 million is available for centers; $55 million for FY 2009, of which 

$10 million is available for centers; and $60 million for each year of FY 2010 

through FY 2012, of which $10 million is available in each year for centers. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING
102 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362j3.eps
103 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ee.eps
104 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ff.eps
105 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362gg.eps
106 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362hh.eps
107 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ii.eps
108 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362jj.eps
109 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362kk.eps
110 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ll.eps
111 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362mm.eps
112 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362nn.eps
113 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362oo.eps
114 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362pp.eps
115 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362qq.eps
116 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362rr.eps
117 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ss.eps
118 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362tt.eps
119 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362uu.eps
120 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362vv.eps
121 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362ww.eps
122 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362xx.eps
123 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362yy.eps
124 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362zz.eps
125 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362a3.eps
126 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362b3.eps
127 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362c3.eps
128 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362d3.eps
129 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362e3.eps
130 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362f3.eps
131 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362g3.eps
132 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362h3.eps
133 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362i3.eps
134 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362k3.eps
135 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362l3.eps
136 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362m3.eps
137 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362n3.eps
138 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362o3.eps
139 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362p3.eps
140 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362q3.eps
141 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362r3.eps
142 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362s3.eps
143 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362t3.eps
144 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362u3.eps
145 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362v3.eps
146 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARINGhr362w3.eps
147 

H.R. 362 SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT

• Inserts ‘‘technology’’ in all references to K–12 science and mathematics education. 

• Allows Noyce Program scholarship recipients to complete program within five 

years, rather than in four years. 

• For review of applications under the Noyce program, adds the requirement 

for NSF to consider the ability of the applicant to attract women and minority 

students. 

• Revises Noyce program reporting requirements to track proportion of graduates who teach in high-need schools, who fail to fulfill their teaching commitment in a high-need school, and who persist in teaching beyond their service commitment, including in high-need schools. 

• Provides a single authorization of appropriations for each year of the Noyce 

program (removes floors and ceilings for ‘‘capacity building activities’’). 

• Replaces references to AP and IB courses with ‘‘challenging math, science, 

and technology college-preparatory courses, including AP and IB courses’’. 

• Allows part-time Masters’ degree programs to cover three years, rather than 

being limited to two years. 

• Redefines ‘‘high-need local education agency’’—concentration of children from 

low income families AND shortage of highly qualified teachers. 

• Eliminates the term ‘‘master teacher’’ in favor of ‘‘teacher leader.’’

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with HEARING