U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

86–898PDF 2013

PRIVATE SECTOR PROGRAMS 

THAT ENGAGE STUDENTS IN STEM 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JANUARY 9, 2014 

Serial No. 113–60 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia 

STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming 

DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

VACANCY 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ERIC SWALWELL, California 

DAN MAFFEI, New York 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JOSEPH KENNEDY III, Massachusetts 

SCOTT PETERS, California 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC VEASEY, Texas 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

MARK TAKANO, California 

ROBIN KELLY, Illinois 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

HON. LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana, Chair 

STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

STEVE STOCKMAN, Texas 

CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming 

DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

FEDERICA WILSON, Florida 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SCOTT PETERS, California 

AMI BERA, California 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut 

ROBIN KELLY, Illinois 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

January 9, 2014 

Page 

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Larry Bucshon, Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Research and Technology, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 

U.S. House of Representatives ............................................................................ 1 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 5 

Statement by Representative Daniel Lipinski, Ranking Minority Member, 

Subcommittee on Research and Technology, Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ............................................... 6 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 7 

Statement by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 8 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 9 

Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .... 10 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 11 

Witnesses: 

PANEL I 

Mr. Dean Kamen, Founder, For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and 

Technology (FIRST), Founder and President, DEKA Research & Development Corporation 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 12 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 14 

Mr. Hadi Partovi, Co-founder and CEO, Code.org 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 26 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 28 

Dr. Kemi Jona, Director, Office of STEM Education Partnerships, Research 

Professor, Learning Sciences and Computer Sciences, Northwestern University 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 53 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 56 

Dr. Phillip Cornwell, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 78 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 81 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 85 

PANEL II 

Ms. Ellana Crew, 12th Grade, South River High School, Edgewater, Maryland 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 109 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 111 
Page

IV 

Mr. Brian Morris, 12th Grade, Chantilly Academy, Chantilly, Virginia 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 113 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 115 

Mr. Daniel Nette, 11th Grade, George Mason High School, Falls Church, 

Virginia 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 116 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 117 

Mr. Vishnu Rachakonda, 12th Grade, Eleanor Roosevelt High School, Greenbelt, Maryland 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 119 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 121 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 123

Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions 

Mr. Dean Kamen, Founder, For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and 

Technology (FIRST), Founder and President, DEKA Research & Development Corporation ................................................................................................. 134 

Mr. Hadi Partovi, Co-founder and CEO, Code.org ................................................ 137 

Dr. Phillip Cornwell, Vice President for Academic Affairs, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology .......................... 142 
(1) 

PRIVATE SECTOR PROGRAMS THAT ENGAGE 

STUDENTS IN STEM 

THURSDAY, JANUARY 9, 2014 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:06 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Larry Bucshon 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 
2 
3 
4 
5 

Chairman BUCSHON. The Subcommittee on Research and Technology will come to order. 

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to today’s hearing titled ‘‘Private Sector Programs that Engage Students in STEM,’’ which we 

all know is a very important subject. 

In front of you are packets containing the written testimony, biographies and Truth in Testimony disclosures for today’s witnesses. 

I now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. 

I am happy to call to order the first Research and Technology 

Subcommittee hearing of the new year. Today we will learn about 

private sector initiatives in science, technology, engineering and 

mathematics, or STEM, education and how these companies, businesses and organizations engage students in these important fields. 

A report released by the National Science Board in 2012 indicates that the science and engineering workforce historically grows 

faster than the total workforce. Although the science and engineering growth rate has maintained a higher rate than the total workforce, the last decade has seen much lower growth. 

One of the most essential aspects to keeping America at the forefront of STEM innovation, advancement and development is engaging students at a young age and keeping them interested in pursuing STEM degrees and careers. 

As a cardiothoracic surgeon and father of four children between 

the ages of 9 and 20, I understand that such programs and activities are necessary to enhance America’s economic growth and competitiveness. With the federal government spending nearly $3 billion across 13 federal agencies on STEM education programs each 

year, we must ensure the government is leveraging rather than duplicating private sector STEM education initiatives. 

Our hearing today will provide a unique opportunity for our first 

panel of witnesses to discuss the innovative projects and programs 

taking place at their private sector business and educational institutions, and for our second panel of witnesses to discuss their personal experiences with these types of initiatives. 

I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses and I would 

like to thank them for their participation and offering their time 

and insight into the private sector’s success in STEM education. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bucshon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

CHAIRMAN LARRY BUCSHON

I am happy to call to order the first Research and Technology Subcommittee hearing of the year. Today we will learn about private sector initiatives in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM, education and how these companies, businesses and organizations engage students in these important fields. 

A report released by the National Science Board in 2012 indicates that the science 

and engineering workforce historically grows faster than the total workforce. Although the science and engineering growth rate has maintained a higher rate than 

the total workforce, the last decade has seen much lower growth. 

One of the most essential aspects to keeping America at the forefront of STEM 

innovation, advancement and development is engaging students at a young age and 

keeping them interested in pursuing STEM degrees and careers. 

As a cardiothoracic surgeon and father of four children between the ages of 9 and 

20, I understand that such programs and activities are necessary to enhance America’s economic growth and competitiveness. 

With the federal government spending nearly $3 billion dollars across thirteen 

federal agencies on STEM education programs each year, we must ensure the gov-
6 

ernment is leveraging rather than duplicating private sector STEM education initiatives. 

Our hearing today will provide a unique opportunity for our first panel of witnesses to discuss the innovative projects and programs taking place at their private 

sector business and educational institutions, and for our second panel of witnesses 

to discuss their personal experiences with these types of initiatives. 

I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses and I would like to thank them 

for their participation and offering their time and insight into the private sector’s 

success in STEM education. 

Chairman BUCSHON. At this point I recognize the Ranking Member, the gentleman from Illinois, for an opening statement, five 

minutes. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Chairman Bucshon. I want to thank all 

of our witnesses for being here today. 

One of the reasons that I had joined this Committee when I first 

came to Congress is because of my strong interest in working to 

improve math and science education in this country. I am one of 

only a dozen engineers in the House and Senate, and my wife was 

a math major in college and, unlike me, her STEM training led her 

directly into a career as an actuary. So from my own family experiences and what I have seen and heard from others, I am very 

aware of how important it is that we do a good job of engaging and 

educating our students at all levels in STEM fields. 

But with the release last month of the latest PISA results, we 

were reminded yet again of the troubling statistics on the state of 

U.S. math and science education. U.S. K–12 students rank in the 

middle of the pack in international comparisons of math and 

science aptitude. We see the problems at all job levels. I am constantly hearing from manufacturing companies in my district that 

they have a hard time finding employees who have even basic math 

and science skills. In higher education, we have far too few students pursuing and completing degrees in certain STEM fields to 

meet the needs of domestic industry. For example, less than 2.4 

percent of college students graduate with a degree in computer 

science, despite tremendous demand for these skills, and that number has dropped over the last decade. 

Our troubles start from the earliest grades and are part of a negative feedback cycle that we have to break. Students who aren’t 

learning the necessary skills by the time they graduate high school 

are much less likely to pursue, and to succeed, in STEM fields in 

college. When we lose an undergraduate student from a STEM 

field, we lose a scientist or engineer who could potentially pursue 

a career in teaching the next generation. 

We know these to be complex problems with no easy or one-sizefits-all solution. That is why partnerships between the private sector, Federal and state governments, colleges, universities, local 

school districts, national labs, science museums, zoos and aquaria, 

and all types of nonprofits are more important today than ever. 

The United States still has some of the best K–12 schools, colleges 

and universities in the world, and our top students at all levels 

compete easily with the top students from around the world. That 

is why I am glad we have witnesses here today that can speak to 

the types of STEM partnerships needed to engage young minds at 

an early age and keep them engaged in STEM fields. In particular, 

Northwestern University’s Office of STEM Education Partnerships 
7 

connects K–12 teachers and students to world-class STEM resources of Northwestern University and corporations in the state of 

Illinois such as Boeing, Baxter, Google, Hewlett Packard, IBM and 

more. I am especially proud as a graduate of Northwestern with 

my degree in mechanical engineering. 

Today’s hearing focuses on private sector and university STEM 

engagement programs. I look forward to hearing from these accomplished individuals who have dedicated their careers to improving 

STEM engagement and learning in their communities and across 

the Nation. I also look forward to hearing from the students who 

have participated in the FIRST Robotics competition. 

But I also want to say a few words about the Federal role in this 

partnership. The federal government invests $3 billion in STEM 

education across 14 agencies. While that is a large dollar figure, it 

is important to put that number in perspective. Less than half of 

that is focused at the K–12 level. Federal investments in K–12 education overall account for only ten percent of total U.S. funding for 

K–12 education, and the Federal share of STEM funding is likely 

much less than ten percent. So the Federal role is limited, but it 

is also unique and necessary. 

The National Science Foundation is the single most important 

source of research, development, and testing of innovative new 

models for STEM education. The federal government also has an 

unrivaled ability to convene stakeholders and to leverage private 

sector investment in STEM education. Entrepreneurs like Mr. 

Kamen and Mr. Partovi did not have to start from scratch. They 

are smart businessmen investing in, perfecting, and expanding evidence-based ideas and programs. So while the federal government 

cannot begin to solve our STEM education challenges alone, we 

would be remiss to ignore the important role the government does 

play. I hope that this Committee will continue to exercise its oversight authority to ensure that we get the most out of our relatively 

small but critical Federal STEM education programs. 

I want to thank Chairman Bucshon again for calling this hearing, and the witnesses as well for taking the time today to offer 

their insights and experiences. 

With that, I will yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

RANKING MINORITY MEMBER DANIEL LIPINSKI

Thank you, Chairman Bucshon, and thank you to all of the witnesses for being 

here today. One of the reasons I joined this Committee is because of my strong interest in working to improve math and science education in this country. I am one 

of only a dozen members of the House and Senate who has an engineering degree. 

My wife was a math major in college and—unlike me—her STEM training led her 

directly into a career as an actuary. From our own family experiences and what I 

have seen over the years, I am very aware of how important it is that we do a good 

job of engaging and educating our students at all levels in STEM fields. 

But with the release last month of the latest PISA results, we were reminded yet 

again of the troubling statistics on the state of U.S. math and science education. 

U.S. K–12 students rank in the middle of the pack in international comparisons of 

math and science aptitude. We see the problems at all job levels. I constantly hear 

from manufacturers back home that they have a hard time finding employees who 

have even basic math and science skills. In higher education we have far too few 

students pursuing and completing degrees in certain STEM fields to meet the needs 
8 

of domestic industry. For example, less than 2.4% of college students graduate with 

a degree in computer science, despite tremendous demand for these skills, and that 

number has dropped over the last decade. 

Our troubles start from the earliest grades and are part of a negative feedback 

cycle that we must break. Students who aren’t learning the necessary skills by the 

time they graduate high school are much less likely to pursue, and to succeed, in 

STEM fields in college. When we lose an undergraduate student from a STEM field, 

we lose a scientist or engineer who could potentially pursue a career in teaching 

the next generation. 

We know these to be complex problems with no easy or one-size-fits-all solution. 

That’s why partnerships between the private sector, Federal and state governments, 

colleges, universities, local school districts, national labs, science museums, zoos and 

aquaria, and all types of nonprofits are more important than ever. The U.S. still 

has some of the best K–12 schools, colleges, and universities in the world, and our 

top students at all levels compete easily with the top students from around the 

world. That’s why I’m glad we have witnesses here today that can speak to the 

types of STEM partnerships needed to engage young minds at an early age and 

keep them engaged in STEM fields. In particular, Northwestern University’s Office 

of STEM Education Partnerships connects K-12 teachers and students to the worldclass STEM resources of Northwestern University and corporations in the state of 

Illinois such as Boeing, Baxter, Google, Hewlett Packard, IBM, and more. 

Today’s hearing focuses on private sector and university STEM engagement programs. I look forward to hearing from these accomplished individuals who have 

dedicated their careers to improving STEM engagement and learning in their communities and across the nation. I also look forward to hearing from the students 

who have participated in the FIRST Robotics competition. 

But I also want to say a few words about the federal role in this partnership. The 

Federal Government invests $3 billion in STEM education across 14 agencies. While 

that is a large dollar figure, it’s important to put that number in perspective. Less 

than half of that is focused at the K–12 level. Federal investments in K–12 education overall account for only 10 percent of total U.S. funding for K–12 education, 

and the federal share of STEM funding is likely much less than 10 percent. So the 

federal role is limited, but it is also unique and necessary. The National Science 

Foundation is the single most important source for research, development, and testing of innovative new models for STEM education. 

The federal government also has an unrivaled ability to convene stakeholders and 

to leverage private sector investment in STEM education. Entrepreneurs like Mr. 

Kamen and Mr. Partovi did not have to start from scratch. They are smart businessmen investing in, perfecting, and expanding evidence-based ideas and programs. So 

while the federal government cannot begin to solve our STEM education challenges 

alone, we would be remiss to ignore the important role the government does play. 

I hope that this Committee will continue to exercise its oversight authority to ensure that we get the most out of our relatively small, but critical federal STEM education programs. 

I want to thank Chairman Bucshon again for calling this hearing, and the witnesses as well for taking the time to offer their insights and experiences with us 

today. And with that, I yield back. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

I now recognize the Chairman of the full Committee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, let me comment on the atmosphere I ran into when 

I entered the room before the hearing officially began and the gavel 

came down, because it was an atmosphere unlike almost any other 

hearing I have walked into. The atmosphere was almost festive, 

and people were excited because they are interested in this subject, 

and I think we are excited also about what we are going to hear 

from our witnesses today in the case of both panels. This is a subject that fascinates us, I think, and we all realize it is absolutely 

a key to the future prosperity of this country. So it was fun to walk 

into that kind of an environment. 

Mr. Chairman, to achieve the innovations of tomorrow, we must 

better educate American students today. The federal government 
9 

spends nearly $3 billion each year on science, technology, engineering and math education activities. These programs are found primarily at the National Science Foundation and the Department of 

Education. 

Today we will hear from leaders and experts from private sector 

organizations that focus on engaging students in STEM education. 

Two of them were established for this express purpose. We need to 

learn what is taking place outside of the federal government so we 

can be sure we are not spending taxpayer dollars on duplicative 

programs, and we need to more effectively use taxpayers’ dollars to 

gain the most benefit for our students and our country. It is critical 

to understand what is working and how we can build on that success. 

The leaders of these organizations and the student participants 

here today are in a good position to provide us with useful information. 

A well-educated and trained STEM workforce will promote our 

future economic prosperity. But we must persuade our Nation’s 

youth to study science and engineering so they will want to pursue 

these careers. Great strides are being made in STEM education by 

the organizations represented here today, FIRST and Code.org, and 

by institutions like the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and 

Northwestern University. 

Unfortunately, American students still lag behind students of 

other nations when it comes to STEM education. American students, according to one poll, rank 26th in math and 21st in science. 

This is not the record of a country that expects to remain a world 

leader. 

We need to ensure that young adults have the scientific and 

mathematic skills to strive and thrive in a technology-based economy. You can’t have innovation without advances in technology, 

and the STEM students of today will lead us to the cutting-edge 

technologies of tomorrow. 

The students participating in our second panel are proof that a 

STEM education can prepare our next generation of scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs and leaders. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I look forward to hearing from 

our witnesses today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FULL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN LAMAR S. SMITH

To achieve the innovations of tomorrow, we must better educate American students today. The federal government spends nearly $3 billion dollars each year on 

science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education activities. These programs are found primarily at the National Science Foundation and the Department 

of Education. 

Today we will hear from leaders and experts from private sector organizations 

that focus on engaging students in STEM education. Two of them were established 

for this express purpose. 

We need to learn what is taking place outside of the federal government so we 

can be sure we are not spending taxpayer dollars on duplicative programs. And we 

need to more effectively use taxpayers’ dollars to gain the most benefit for our students and our country. 

It is critical to understand what is working and how we can build on that success. 

The leaders of these organizations and the student participants here today are in 

a good position to provide us with useful information. 
10 

A well-educated and trained STEM workforce will promote our future economic 

prosperity. But we must persuade our nation’s youth to study science and engineering so they will want to pursue these careers. 

Great strides are being made in STEM education by the organizations represented 

here today, FIRST and Code.org, and by institutions like the Rose-Hulman Institute 

of Technology and Northwestern University. Unfortunately, American students still 

lag behind students of other nations when it comes to STEM education. American 

students according to one poll rank 26th in math and 21st in science. This is not 

the record of a country that expects to remain a world leader. 

We need to ensure that young adults have the scientific and mathematic skills 

to strive and thrive in a technology-based economy. You can’t have innovation without advances in technology. And the STEM students of today will lead us to the cutting-edge technologies of tomorrow. 

The students participating in our second panel are proof that a STEM education 

can prepare our next generation of scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs and leaders. 

I look forward to hearing about the STEM programs and activities of our witnesses. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you, Chairman. 

I now recognize the Ranking Member, the gentlelady from Texas, 

Ms. Johnson, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you for holding this hearing. 

I would like to start by asking all of the students that are 

present to stand. I want to congratulate you, and I am truly impressed by your leadership and your accomplishments. You should 

be very proud because you will be our leaders of tomorrow. Thank 

you for standing. 

Unfortunately, too many students across the country do not have 

the opportunities to participate in inspiring STEM activities or to 

receive a high-quality STEM education. Once again, our students 

were just in the middle of the pack in the latest international test 

of science and math proficiency. I had a long visit just last night 

with the minister of education from Japan, and we talked about 

that a lot. 

We can no longer depend on our top few percent to maintain a 

strong and vibrant economy with good, high-paying jobs in our own 

communities. Our competitive edge will be lost if we do not vastly 

improve STEM education in this country for all of our students. 

We know that this is a complex challenge that no entity can 

solve alone. There is no silver bullet. And there is a role for all the 

key stakeholders, public and private. Today we hear from two entrepreneurs and two education leaders in STEM education. I congratulate them for their important work and thank them for taking 

the time to provide their insight to this Committee today. 

But I also want to emphasize the important and unique role of 

the federal government in improving STEM education. Many Federal STEM programs, including those supported by the National 

Science Foundation and the Department of Education, are making 

a difference in universities, community colleges, and K–12 across 

the nation. There are also many valuable programs being funded 

through other Federal science agencies, such as NASA, NOAA and 

the Department of Energy. These agencies are filled with thousands of scientists and engineers who can make a difference in 

their own communities for students across the country. As working 

STEM professionals, the real life work that they do using STEM 

is so inspiring to our students. Take an astronaut to the classroom. 

You will see what I am talking about. 
11 

But the Federal role is more than that. The National Science 

Foundation is the premier STEM education research organization 

in the country. For decades, NSF has been a leader in developing 

the most effective and inspiring STEM curricula and programs in 

and out of the classroom. When the private sector invests in STEM 

education, they are looking for proven programs with proven outcomes. The National Science Foundation more than any other organization is responsible for building that evidence base. I hope this 

Committee will continue to exercise its responsibility to conduct 

oversight of NSF’s and other agencies’ STEM education programs. 

Today, though, I look forward to hearing from the experts on the 

first panel about their programs and how we measure that impact. 

I also look forward to hearing from the students about what initially sparked their interest in STEM, and what role their teachers, 

parents and other mentors have played in helping them to reach 

their goals. 

I thank all of you for being here today to share this experience. 

I want to see the United States move from 26 to one. When I came 

here over 20 years ago, we were number 18. We are going backwards. We are challenged. We have got to meet that challenge. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FULL COMMITTEE RANKING MEMBER

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Good morning and thank you Chairman Bucshon for holding this hearing. I want 

to start by congratulating the students who are here today and welcoming you to 

the Committee. I am truly impressed by your leadership and your accomplishments, 

and you should all be very proud. 

Unfortunately, too many students across the country do not have opportunities to 

participate in inspiring STEM activities or to receive a high quality STEM education. Once again, our students were just in the middle of the pack in the latest 

international test of science and math proficiency. We can no longer depend on our 

top few percent to maintain a strong and vibrant economy with good, high-paying 

jobs in our own communities. Our competitive edge will be lost if we do not vastly 

improve STEM education in this country for all of our students. 

We know that this is a complex challenge that no one entity can solve alone. 

There is no silver bullet. And, there is a role for all the key stakeholders, public 

and private. Today we hear from two entrepreneurs and two education leaders in 

STEM education. I congratulate them for their important work and thank them for 

taking the time to provide their insight to the Committee today. 

But I also want to emphasize the important and unique role of the federal government in improving STEM education. Many Federal STEM programs, including those 

supported by the National Science Foundation and the Department of Education, 

are making a difference in universities, community colleges, and K–12 schools 

across the nation. There are also many valuable programs being funded through 

other federal science agencies, such as NASA, NOAA, and the Department of Energy. These agencies are filled with thousands of scientists and engineers who can 

make a difference in their own communities and for students across the country. 

As working STEM professionals, the real life work that they do using STEM is so 

inspiring to our children. 

But the federal role is more than that. The National Science Foundation is the 

premier STEM education research organization in the country. For decades, NSF 

has been a leader in developing the most effective and inspiring STEM curricula 

and programs in and out of the classroom. When the private sector invests in STEM 

education, they are looking for proven programs with proven outcomes. NSF, more 

than any other organization, is responsible for building that evidence base. I hope 

this Committee will continue to exercise its responsibility to conduct oversight of 

NSF’s and other agencies’ STEM education programs. 
12 

Today though, I look forward to hearing from the experts on the first panel about 

their programs and how they measure impact. I also look forward to hearing from 

the students about what initially sparked their interest in STEM, and what role 

their teachers, parents, and other mentors have played in helping them to reach 

their goals. Thank you all for being here today to share your experiences with us. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. 

If there are Members who wish to submit additional opening 

statements, your statements will be added to the record at this 

point. 

At this time I am going to introduce our first panel of witnesses. 

Our first witness today is Mr. Dean Kamen. Mr. Kamen is an inventor and entrepreneur and the founder of For Inspiration and 

Recognition of Science and Technology, otherwise known as FIRST, 

and founder and President of DEKA Research and Development 

Corporation. 

Our second witness is Mr. Hadi Partovi. Mr. Partovi is an entrepreneur and an investor who was on the founding teams of Tellme 

and iLike, and worked on Facebook, Dropbox and others as an investor and startup advisor. He co-founded the education nonprofit 

Code.org. Mr. Partovi is a graduate of Harvard. 

Our third witness is Dr. Kemi Jona. Dr. Jona is a Professor of 

Learning Sciences and Computer Science at Northwestern University. He is the founder and Director of Northwestern’s Office of 

STEM Education Partnerships. Dr. Jona holds a Ph.D. from Northwestern and a B.S. in computer science and psychology from the 

University of Wisconsin-Madison. 

Our fourth witness, from my district, is Dr. Phillip Cornwell, 

Vice President for Academic Affairs and Professor of Mechanical 

Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology in Terre 

Haute. Dr. Cornwell received his B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from Texas Tech University and his M.A. and Ph.D. from 

Princeton. 

Our witnesses should know spoken testimony is limited to five 

minutes. There will be some latitude given. 

And I now recognize Mr. Kamen for five minutes to present his 

testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. DEAN KAMEN, FOUNDER, 

FOR INSPIRATION AND RECOGNITION 

OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FIRST), 

FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT, 

DEKA RESEARCH & 

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 

[video] 

Mr. KAMEN. You have to do what the voice of God tells you. 

Firstly, thank you, Chairman Smith, thank you, Chairman 

Bucshon, thank you, Ranking Member Lipinski, and thank you, 

Ranking Member Johnson. Each one of you has made comments 

that make this seem like it is going to be real easy. I think everybody understands the problem, everybody understands the importance of reinvigorating the entire generation of American kids to be 

leaders in the world in science and tech. 

Maybe this is unusual for you. I don’t know much about Washington but it seems like everybody comes here asking for some-
13 

thing. I can tell you, I as DEKA Research am not asking you for 

anything for me or my company, and I as the founder of FIRST am 

not asking you for anything for FIRST. FIRST has 3,500 corporate 

sponsors now. FIRST has 160 universities that are desperate to 

help get these kids into their system. They gave us last year over 

$18 million in scholarships to give out at our championship. We 

will have more this year. 

I am not asking you for them, but there are a few tens of millions of kids in this country that don’t have access to FIRST. They 

are not capable of leveraging what these 3,500 corporate sponsors 

that are donating 120,000 world-class scientists and engineers. You 

can’t buy these people. You couldn’t afford them, and you can’t buy 

passion. They do it because they care, because they are serious 

adults and professionals and parents. They know that we have got 

to invigorate kids to do something like this, so I am here to ask 

you to figure out how to get FIRST available to all these schools, 

and by doing that, you will be able to leverage what FIRST has put 

together over the last 25 years, and I think it will be a winner for 

everybody. 

My little red light is on, so I guess I have to shut up. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kamen follows:] 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Mr. Partovi for his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. HADI PARTOVI, 

CO-FOUNDER AND CEO, CODE.ORG 

Mr. PARTOVI. Thank you very much. My name is Hadi Partovi. 

I learned to program early when I was young. I studied computer 

science at Harvard, and this set up my career with an early job at 

Microsoft. 

Sorry. I think you already heard me. I started my early career 

as a computer scientist. I learned to program young and I studied 

computer science at Harvard, and this set up my career with a 

great job at Microsoft. I co-founded multiple companies and was an 

early investor in some of our country’s most successful startups. 

Starting from nothing, I am now living the American dream, and 

this is because of my foundation in computer science. Computer 

science fuels the American dream, and I am here not to testify on 

behalf of the organization I founded, Code.org, but I guess in support of the field, in support of computer science, and the reason is 

because 90 percent of our schools don’t teach computer science. 

I want to play a short video from the supporters of Code.org to 

give you, in their words, why this field is important. 

[Video shown.] 

So my organization’s goal is to bring computers science to all the 

schools of this country, and people often confuse what is computer 

science. When I went to school, every student and every school 

would teach how to dissect a frog or how electricity works, and I 

believe in this 21st century, it is equally important to learn how 

to dissect an app or how the Internet works, and this is fundamental not only to millions of careers in technology but even for 

students who don’t ever want to pursue a career in technology. For 

people who want to become doctors or lawyers or accountants or 

elected officials, it is important to understand how the world 

around us works. 

Speaking about the careers in computer science, the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics projects 1.4 million jobs over ten years being created in this field, and the National Science Foundation projects 

only 400,000 graduates going into the field. That adds up to a million jobs in the gap between jobs and students, which adds up to 

$500 billion in salaries. 

What is more, these jobs are in every state and every industry. 

This isn’t about Google or Microsoft having trouble hiring skilled 

laborers. Only one-third of computing jobs are in technology. The 

rest are in banking, manufacturing, government, retail, et cetera. 

If there is one thing I want you to remember from today, it is 

the charts I am showing up here. 

[Chart] 

The chart on the left shows you the amount of time high school 

students spend in all of STEM and the small sliver that is computer science. The chart on the right shows the jobs in all of STEM 

and the very giant segment that is computer science, and you wonder, why is there a mismatch there? Because 90 percent of our 

schools do not even teach this field. And of the tiny sliver that do 

study computer science, only 15 percent are girls, and less than 
27 

eight percent are Hispanic Americans and African Americans. It is 

a huge problem for our country, and our policies don’t support it. 

In 33 of 50 states, computer science doesn’t even count towards 

high school STEM requirements, and of the billions of dollars of 

federal money that you all mentioned being spent on STEM, almost 

none of it goes to computer science because of regulatory barriers 

we want to have you guys help remove from the system. 

People often ask me, can our students learn this, can our teachers teach it, why are we not focusing just on basic math, which we 

are already failing at, and we proved last month that our students 

can learn it. We ran a campaign called the Hour of Code. It was 

kicked off by the President, the House Majority Leader, Senators 

and Newt Gingrich in partnership with 100 companies—Google, 

Microsoft, Apple—the government, the College Board and many 

others. We had 20 million students participate with 17 million in 

the United States. One out of every four students in U.S. schools 

learned an hour of code and half of them were girls. It is an amazing accomplishment. To put this into context, the College Board AP 

Computer Science Exam has 32,000 students participating; the College Board AP Calculus Exam, 300,000; all of U.S. FIRST clubs, 

350,000 students; the math SAT, 1.7 million. The Hour of Code had 

17 million participants, and it goes to show that our kids can learn 

this. 

So we have proven that America wants this, our students want 

it, our parents want it, and I am not talking about Code, I am talking about computer science. The question for you is, how do you answer the parent who asks, why isn’t this foundational field being 

taught in my children’s schools and how can the U.S. government 

remove the barriers that get in the way right now. 

I have a very short video to show, 30 seconds of a girl who came 

back, one of the 17 million students in America who came back to 

her mom or dad after learning one hour of code. 

[Video shown.] 

Every kid in America can learn computer science. Ninety percent 

of our schools don’t teach it. We can help fix this. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Partovi follows:] 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. 

I now recognize Dr. Jona for five minutes for his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. KEMI JONA, DIRECTOR, 

OFFICE OF STEM EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS, 

RESEARCH PROFESSOR, LEARNING SCIENCES 

AND COMPUTER SCIENCES, 

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 

Dr. JONA. Well, good morning, Members of the Committee. I 

would like to thank Ranking Members Lipinski and Johnson and 

Chairmen Bucshon and Smith for inviting me to testify today. 

The mission of my office is to connect K–12 teachers and students to the world-class STEM resources of Northwestern University and beyond. To date, we work with a growing network of over 

200 Chicago-area schools, over 600 teachers who reach approximately 48,000 students, and since I am sitting next to Hadi, I am 

proud to announce that next week Chicago Public Schools is 

launching Code.org’s computer science curriculum for all of its high 

schools, so we are really pleased to be part of that. 

My testimony today focuses on three models that we have found 

successful in engaging industry partners in STEM initiatives. All 

three examples illustrate the importance of building in both 

scalability and sustainability, and all three have leveraged private 

sector support to expand and sustain federal investments. We are 

fortunate to work with many industry partners including Boeing, 

Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Motorola and Siemens. 

The first example that I would like to share today is our work 

with Baxter International, a global health care company located 

outside of Chicago. Their generous support has created a Biotechnology Center of Excellence at Lindblom Math and Science 

Academy, which is a grade 7–12 public school located on the southwest side of Chicago that serves a predominantly minority and lowincome student population. This Center of Excellence provides 

teachers with professional development, lab equipment and other 

resources focused on the important field of biotechnology. These are 

provided not just to Lindblom teachers but to teachers from across 

the district. In the last few years, we have trained 168 teachers 

from 115 different schools reaching over 20,000 students. This Center of Excellence model is building self-sustaining capacity in the 

Chicago Public Schools to improve the teaching of biotechnology 

across the entire district. 

One of the curriculum offerings available to teachers is an innovative set of high school biology labs we developed in partnership 

with my colleague, Dr. Teresa Woodruff in our medical school. 

These labs are based on Dr. Woodruff’s NIH-funded research in 

oncofertility. The Center of Excellence model demonstrates the 

power of partnerships between the private sector, universities and 

public schools. The federal NIH dollars invested continue to pay 

dividends as hundreds of teachers and thousands of students each 

year benefit through the ongoing support provided by Baxter. 

A second example I would like to share with you today is called 

Illinois Pathways. Illinois Pathways is a State of Illinois-led STEM 

education initiative that has created new public-private partner-
54 

ships known as STEM learning exchanges. Each of the nine exchanges coordinates investments, resources and planning in STEM 

industry sectors like information technology, manufacturing, energy and research and development. This effort launched with $2.3 

million in Federal Race to the Top money and which was then leveraged to $8.5 million in public and private matching funds. The 

Illinois Business Roundtable, an organization made up of CEOs 

and other industry leaders, has been a key driver of this initiative 

in our state. 

Northwestern is a proud member of the Research and Development Learning Exchange. One of our signature projects is a mentor 

matching engine. This online resource pairs students with private 

industry mentors to conduct independent research in STEM fields. 

You can think of it as sort of like a Match.com for student researchers. By conducting mentors and students online, this Web 

site helps to level the playing field by facilitating access to mentors 

for students all across the State, especially in our rural and urban 

areas. The STEM exchanges have been instrumental in organizing 

previously uncoordinated private sector, university and school participation in STEM, and they serve as statewide distribution platforms for STEM education resources. 

The third and final example I would like to share is our out-ofschool program called FUSE. It is a project funded by the MacArthur Foundation and the National Science Foundation as well as 

companies including Motorola Mobility, Siemens and IBM. The 

goal of FUSE is to engage youth, especially those from underrepresented groups, in STEAM topics—and we add the arts and design 

to STEM—while fostering the development of important 21st century skills like creative problem solving, persistence and grit. Challenges are the core activity of FUSE studies, and I would like to 

play a short clip now that illustrates some of the fun and engaging 

challenges that we have developed with our private sector partners. 

[Video shown.] 

So FUSE currently has 20 challenge sequences in areas such as 

robotics, electronics, solar energy, jewelry design, and 3D printing. 

Some of the ones that are on the video exemplify this. The jewelry 

designer challenge is in particular very popular with girls, and it 

uses all of the same design and 3D printing skills that you need 

for advanced manufacturing and other skills. So FUSE is yet another example of a platform that can be scaled up to engage large 

numbers of youth in STEM or STEAM fields. For our industry 

partners, the modular challenge format that you see here and a 

focus on out-of-school-time learning is often more appealing than 

in-school curriculum development that can be very slow and bureaucratic. FUSE provides a dissemination network as new challenges are offered to youth at our growing network of 17 sites 

around the Chicago metro area. 

So to wrap up, my key message today is that what has been 

missing from the recent discussions of federal STEM policy is a recognition of the importance of creating robust dissemination mechanisms, mechanisms that support the scalability and sustainability 

of high-quality STEM education programs developed with either 

federal or private sector support. To really engage students with 

high-quality STEM education, we need the leadership and support 
55 

of both the federal government and the private sector to create distribution platforms like the iTunes App Store or the Android Play 

Store for our smartphones to create the similar kinds of distribution platforms for STEM education resources like the examples I 

highlighted today. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Jona follows:] 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Dr. Cornwell for five minutes for his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. PHILLIP CORNWELL, 

VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, 

PROFESSOR OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, 

ROSE-HULMAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 

Dr. CORNWELL. Chairman Bucshon, Chairman Smith, Ranking 

Members Lipinski and Johnson, thank you so much for inviting me 

to be here today. 

As you were told, my name is Phil Cornwell. I am Vice President 

for Academic Affairs and a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at 

Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Rose-Hulman is a university 

focused entirely on math, science and engineering education. For 

the last 15 years, U.S. News and World Reports has ranked us as 

number one in our category, which is basically engineering programs at schools that don’t offer a Ph.D. We have about 2,200 students, which makes us a small school but a midsized college of engineering. Our placement rate last year was about 99 percent and 

is always 99 percent. Our average starting salary is about $67,000. 

The mission of Rose-Hulman is to provide our students with the 

world’s best undergraduate science, engineering and mathematics 

education in an environment of individual attention and support. 

What that means is that we hire faculty members who have a passion for their technical field but also a passion for students in undergraduate education. Our goal is to graduate technically outstanding, well-rounded, liberally educated STEM professionals; and 

even though our primary focus is undergraduates, we do have a 

number of outreach activities I wanted to share with you. 

One of our most successful is called Operation Catapult, which 

is a three-week summer program. Students come to campus, they 

live on campus, and they participate in lots of activities; but most 

important, they work on a technical project that has a faculty 

member as the mentor. About 30 percent of the students that attend Catapult end up coming to Rose-Hulman. The other 70 percent study STEM at other universities. So, it is a great way of solidifying their interest in STEM. 

We also have a program called Homework Hotline, which has 

been around since 1991. That is a math and science tutoring program for students in grades 6 through 12. If a student has problems with math and science homework and they can’t get help at 

home, they can call Rose-Hulman where Rose-Hulman students are 

available as tutors to help the students not just get the answer, but 

understand the material. 

We also do a lot with industry, and I will just mention one 

unique program that is called Rose-Hulman Ventures. RoseHulman Ventures is basically an engineering consulting business 

that operates on the Rose-Hulman campus. Students that work 

with Rose-Hulman Ventures are student interns that work under 

the supervision of a professional project manager with client companies on projects that are important to the company. It could be 

working on a coding project, it could be developing a prototype, it 

could be developing a product. It is just something that is important to the client, and the clients typically pay time and materials. 
79 

Companies range from small startups like Fast BioMedical or 

NICO to large companies like Alcoa, Cummins or Dow Agro. 

One of the reasons for this Committee hearing, I believe, is the 

recognition that we need more STEM professionals in the United 

States; and for me, there are two key things that we need to accomplish that. One is to increase the pipeline and increase the number 

of students interested in STEM, which is largely what we are talking about today; but, secondly, we also need to, once those students 

enter college, graduate more of them and help them be successful. 

As far as the pipeline, I think programs like FIRST Robotics, curriculum like Project Lead the Way, and many other programs do 

a fantastic job of energizing students and helping students see engineering or computer science as a possible career option, which I 

think is absolutely critical. But I also think it is equally important 

to strengthen our math, science and, I would add, computer science 

curriculum in the high schools, so when they get to college, they 

are prepared to be successful in the very rigorous curricula that are 

required for all of those majors. 

As far as retention and graduation rates, if we forget the pipeline 

issue and look at the students that currently enter college with an 

interest in studying engineering, which is my area of expertise— 

less than 50 percent graduate. At Rose-Hulman, it is 80 percent. 

It varies widely from school to school. But if we could increase that 

number by just ten percent, if I did my calculations correctly, that 

means within six years we could graduate 100,000 additional engineers without doing anything to the pipeline. We are just helping 

more of our students graduate. 

How do we do that? There is actually a lot of research on the 

topic. Some things that I think are important include an early connection of students to the discipline; and, again, FIRST Robotics 

does a great job of that. Most freshman design programs do that. 

It is very frustrating to have a really smart student drop out of engineering and they say ‘‘well, it is because I don’t like engineering,’’ 

but as a freshman, they have never had any engineering. It just 

drives you crazy. 

Secondly, I do think having faculty members whose first priority 

is teaching and working with students and helping them be successful is important in terms of persistence and graduation rate. I 

can share some stories about that if you are interested. I also think 

undergraduate research and internships are important for retention and graduation rates. 

So what can the federal government do? Certainly, continue to 

support undergraduate research—I think that is critical. Perhaps 

incentivize companies to offer early internships. Most companies 

offer internships for juniors and possibly sophomores because they 

consider that a critical part of their recruitment, but it is much 

harder for students to get a meaningful internship as freshmen. 

You could also incentivize students who study STEM through perhaps lower interest rates for student loans or perhaps loan forgiveness. There are lots of ways to possibly incentivize this. 

I tell prospective students at Rose-Hulman all the time that a 

STEM education is great no matter what they want to do. If they 

want to go to industry, if they want to go to graduate school, if they 

want to go to medical school or business school, if they want to be-
80 

come a politician, engineering STEM is great; and I applaud this 

Committee for taking the leadership role in promoting STEM research as well as STEM education. 

So again, thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to 

testify. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Cornwell follows:] 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 

Chairman BUCSHON. You are welcome, and I would like to thank 

all the witnesses for their testimony, and I will remind the Members of the Committee that the rules limit questioning to five minutes. The Chair at this point will open the round of questions, so 

I recognize myself for five minutes. 

As a cosponsor of the Computer Science Education Act, I share 

many of the concerns that you do, and I am quite pleased that my 

home State of Indiana is one that allows a rigorous computer 

science course to satisfy core high school graduation credit, particularly since according to the Conference Board, there are 4,864 open 

computing jobs in Indiana right now. That is changing by the 

minute, I am assuming. 

According to your analytics, 264,000 Indiana students did the 

Hour of Code in December 2013. Mr. Partovi, what do you see as 

the next steps for those students if they want to pursue studying 

computer science? 

Mr. PARTOVI. Thank you very much for that question. We were 

astonished to find 17 million students in this country do the Hour 

of Code, and we were actually prepared to offer more than one hour 

in terms of instruction. The one hour was enough to demystify the 

field for teachers, parents, students to all realize that computer 

science is something that anybody can learn, but we also had a follow-on curriculum that any student could learn online or any 

teacher could teach online. We are already within one month at the 

point that over 10,000 classrooms are teaching a full computer 

science class to almost 500,000 students. 

To put this into context, in October— at any point in history 

there has been at most 10,000 classrooms in the country teaching 

computer science. In one month, we have doubled it. In terms of 

the number of students studying it, we have almost tripled or 

quadrupled it within one month because of the follow-on from the 

Hour of Code. It shows this is an incredibly popular topic with students, parents and teachers, and our only ask, and not for Code.org 

but for the field of computer science is like you have sponsored in 

the CSEA to remove the federal government barriers that prevent 

this field from spreading to our public schools. Thank you very 

much. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. 

Mr. Kamen, what differentiates your program and their offerings 

from other private sector STEM initiatives because you have been 

very successful, and why do you think it has been successful and 

what principles and techniques do you use in your programs that 

would you suggest to apply to the Federal STEM education programs? 

Mr. KAMEN. I think the primary reason we have been successful, 

we are different, is our premise right up front was, 25 years ago, 

the world of parents and politicians and government leaders and 

corporate leaders was, we have an education crisis. My mother is 

a teacher, and she reminds me of that every day. We have a lot 

of great teachers. I am an inventor. What do inventors do? We look 

at the same problems everybody else looks at and see them differently. And I said, you know, my mom is probably right, she always is. We don’t have an education crisis; we have a culture crisis. 

You get the best of what you celebrate in this country, and she 
86 

pointed out, it is not what we don’t have enough of—dedicated 

teachers, surgeons that are willing to commit themselves to public 

service. 

America is built on people that get together and solve a problem. 

Our problem is, we have such a passion in our culture because we 

have become rich, that we can spend time on leisure, and we have 

made superheroes from two places, Hollywood and sports, and particularly for women and minorities, they are sucked into spending 

their time until they are 18 or 19 developing skill sets that aren’t 

likely to lead to great jobs. So I said let us get those industries that 

need these people, let us get these world-class tech companies together, let us them create superheroes, let us use the model that 

works, sports and entertainment, and let us let the private sector 

solve the cultural problem. You get the best of what you celebrate. 

Let us start celebrating science and technology. 

Chairman Smith said it was a festive atmosphere in here. I 

would encourage everybody here to see, because you can’t believe 

it when I say it. We started with one event at the end of our season 

in 1991 in a high school gym in Manchester, New Hampshire. We 

had 23 teams. They came to the one event and it was over. With 

55 percent compound annual growth for 25 years, now we have 

29,000 schools around the world, and our March madness starts 

the first weekend in March. We have more than 60 cities around 

the United States holding spectacularly large events throughout 

March. There is one near every one of you. Every one of you has 

a school in your district that is involved with FIRST. Since we get 

the best of what we celebrate, it wouldn’t be hard to invite you to 

the Final Four or the Super Bowl. You would go. You would find 

the time. 

I would ask two things. You each need to go to one of the events 

in your state and support these kids. First of all, it is a lot of fun. 

Bring your own kids and grandkids. Second of all, you will see 

what happens when kids develop self-confidence and become aware 

that they can do the kinds of things that will lead to great careers, 

and I will also invite you to our championship on April 25th and 

26th under the Arch in St. Louis. We will fill a 76,000-seat arena. 

We succeed because we have got industry behind us. They in 

their own self-interest want these kids to become world-class scientists and engineers and inventors. That is what they need. That 

is what this country needs. We have succeeded because it is the 

private sector. I was told 25 years ago you will never pull this off 

because you are going to run out of giant companies that can support all the schools, and I thought that was my biggest problem. 

These companies just keep delivering. They are mentors. They are 

scientists. They are engineers. The staggering thing to me is, the 

school side. All they need to do is give that math teacher or science 

teacher the same stipend to be the coach of the team as you give 

the football coach for that extra effort after school, and believe it 

or not, the schools have 100-year history of figuring out how to 

fund those other programs. That relatively small commitment, the 

appropriate public side commitment to make sure particularly the 

underserved schools can take advantage of FIRST is what you guys 

need to do, and then we will be in every school in this country. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 
87 

I now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Lipinski, five minutes. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all the 

witnesses for their testimony. It is exciting to hear a lot of these 

things that are going on. I know that more needs to be done. 

I want to ask Dr. Jona a little bit about what you have done at 

Northwestern. It is very impressive what you have done from what 

you have shown us here, what you have in your written testimony. 

I want to ask, because we always face, especially with this issue, 

we have people come and talk about great things that they are 

doing and it is always, okay, how do we expand this, how do we 

replicate it, especially what you have done at Northwestern in the 

Chicago area, is how do we replicate it. So what were some of the 

challenges that you faced in establishing and growing the Office of 

STEM Education Partnerships and what lessons can be taken by 

other institutions who want to establish something similar? 

Dr. JONA. Thank you for that question. The work that we do with 

our faculty and would be similarly done at other institutions is 

largely funded by NSF’s broader impact requirement, and while 

this is an incredibly helpful requirement and stream of funding, 

there really is never enough of those funds to go around. We are 

sort of living on the margins, if you will. And what I guess I would 

like to see is NIH and perhaps other STEM mission agencies 

adopting similar requirements or similar funding streams to broaden out that pool. My written testimony includes a number of recommendations for strengthening and expanding NSF’s broader impact work, but I would say that a key—that is a key source for 

other new offices like mine to get up and running and off the 

ground. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Are there any other things the federal government 

can do? Obviously Northwestern is in a unique position. It is in a 

large urban area. It is a private university. Are there things that 

maybe the federal government could do to help or any suggestions 

you would have other schools that might be looking at doing this 

and may not be in the position Northwestern is in? 

Dr. JONA. Yeah, I feel very strongly that the federal government 

could play an important role in providing seed funding, for example, for offices like mine, especially at smaller institutions or rural 

institutions to help them kind of get jump-started and off the 

ground. Another important role would be to support a national network of these offices so that we could begin to support each other 

and share the best practices that we have developed over time with 

these smaller and newer offices. In addition, this network could 

then serve as sort of a national distribution network for facilitating 

the broader dissemination of federally funded STEM resources that 

are developed at any of our institutions. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you. I have so many other questions that I 

can ask. 

Let me go to this. I know, Mr. Partovi, the Chairman had asked 

some questions, talked to you about what you had done with the 

Hour of Code. I know there are about 830,000 students in the State 

of Illinois who took part in the Hour of Code. What you put up 

there is very stark how many jobs there will be and how few students will be coming out of college for those jobs. Is this something 

that is—how do we make that better understood? It seems like at 
88 

least when I was in college, maybe because I was an engineer, I 

was always looking, okay, where are the jobs supposed to be in 

maybe directing, giving us a sense of where to go. Why is that not 

happening? Is it because of the lack of background and students 

just saying I can’t—that is not something I can do or not something 

I am interested in? Why do you think it is that there isn’t a response to this job demand that we know is out there and will continue to be out there? 

Mr. PARTOVI. Thank you very much. This is a great question. In 

fact, one thing I have trouble getting people to realize is that, you 

know, there is a common thread that there is a crisis of not having 

enough STEM professionals in the country. If you look at the actual data, most STEM fields have too many graduates, whether— 

there are more math graduates than math jobs, there are actually 

more engineering graduates than engineering jobs, more life 

sciences graduates than life sciences jobs, and then way more computer science jobs than computer science graduates, and if you look 

at student decisions, by the time they get to college, many students 

have decided their passion, and if they are in one of the 90 percent 

of schools that doesn’t even teach computer science, they never 

have any background to think I could do this. So the way to solve 

the problem isn’t just building awareness. They know that oh, if I 

could be the next Mark Zuckerberg, that is an amazing future. 

That already is the new American dream. The problem is, they 

think I can’t do it because high school never exposed them to it. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Okay. I see my time is up, so I thank everyone for 

their testimony. 

Chairman BUCSHON. I now recognize Chairman Smith for five 

minutes. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We have gotten a lot of good advice today that I think we ought 

to take to heart. Dr. Cornwell mentioned the corporate component, 

the need to strengthen our curriculum and increase the percentage 

of majors in engineering and I assume other STEM subjects as 

well. Dr. Jona talked about supporting our STEM students outside 

the classroom. Mr. Partovi mentioned the barrier that we face with 

some regulations, and I want to come back to that in a minute, and 

the fact that a lot of schools don’t even teach computer science and 

the big gap between what is taught and what is needed in the 

STEM-type jobs, and Mr. Kamen has talked about encouraging 

STEM students through robotics. 

And Mr. Kamen, let me direct my first question to you. You mentioned at the very last part of your testimony, part of this came 

from your mother, who is a teacher, the need to change our culture 

and celebrate some of these subjects. Let me ask you to expound 

a little bit on that as to how we might do that in a practical way. 

Mr. KAMEN. As I said, one of the things that makes America 

great and we all brag about it is, it is the land of opportunity, but 

if you are not searching for the right opportunity, you are not going 

to find it, and we have celebrated almost to obsession the kinds of 

activities, particularly for kids that don’t have professional parents 

and people around them, so that they not only aren’t aware of or 

don’t have access to learning computer science but I am afraid that 

many of them, the women and the minorities, if they did have ac-
89 

cess wouldn’t do it. They are convinced at a very young age it is 

too difficult, it is too hard, it is not for them. They want to go and 

become good at things for which we all know realistically they are 

no jobs. So we said we are going to convince kids through celebrating science and technology all kids will realize they can do this, 

and as I said before, we succeeded, and I really encourage you all 

to go to one of our events and celebrate with these kids. We have 

89.6 percent of the kids that have come through our program either 

go on to college to study some technology or go directly into fields 

to learn technology and get great jobs. 

The frustration to us is industry, everybody is behind it but the 

school systems, as you know, are a little bit—they lack the resources. 

Chairman SMITH. Right. Let me follow up on that in a minute. 

Just a minute. Thank you, Mr. Kamen. 

Mr. Partovi, I think you mentioned a few minutes ago about the 

regulatory burdens. I checked, and I think I know the problem, and 

that is that in the definition of core academic subjects, there is no 

mention of computer science. Clearly, that definition of core academic subjects is out of date. A bill has been introduced by a colleague of ours, Susan Brooks, to change that definition, and in fact, 

that bill has been cosponsored by our Chairman, by Mr. Lipinski, 

Ms. Esty and I think derek Kilmer as well. I certainly will be adding my name but if Members of the Committee want to know what 

they can do about it to, to bring a greater focus on computer 

science and to make sure it is part of the core curriculum, one answer is to support that particular piece of legislation. So thank you 

for calling that to our attention. 

Let me ask all the panelists, a couple of you all have taught for 

many years. We all know what we need to teach. What should we 

be doing differently as to how we teach these subjects? And maybe 

start with Dr. Cornwell and work back down the panelists. 

Dr. CORNWELL. Well, for me, one of the keys to teaching engineering and computer science is engagement in the material. So 

one—— 

Chairman SMITH. And I will have to ask you all, because of limited time, maybe 30 seconds—— 

Dr. CORNWELL. Right. So what I see exciting in terms of pedagogy and education is flipped classrooms. If there is a passive portion of a class where I am just lecturing and students are listening, 

that is a waste of time, put that online and then redesign the inclass portion to be much more active, much more engaging, and 

much more project-based. That has worked fantastic in courses like 

mechatronics and design courses; but engaging students in the material is really critical, even though you still need that lecture material; use effectively—effective use of technology and increased active engagement to me is a key. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Cornwell. 

Dr. Jona? 

Dr. JONA. I guess I would take a little bit of issue with Mr. 

Kamen’s assertion that one of the big challenges is that STEM is 

too difficult. I actually think that the problem is that it is too risky 

for kids to do in school. If you took his exact program and tried to 

put it in school, kids would be failing all the time because the only 
90 

way to succeed is to try and learn from your mistakes, but that is 

not an environment in school where assessment is so predominant 

now. So kids are more worried about their GPA than about taking 

risks and trying hard things and so a lot of them tend to shy away 

from the STEM fields for that very reason. 

Chairman SMITH. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. Partovi? 

Mr. PARTOVI. I have a really quick answer, which is making it 

more fun, and we actually built tutorials. You saw that little girl’s 

reaction. Our tutorials feature Angry Birds, lectures by Mark 

Zuckerberg or Chris Bosh and literally feel like a game. The kids 

don’t even know that they are learning. They feel like they are 

playing when they use these tutorials. 

Chairman SMITH. Okay. Thank you. 

And Mr. Kamen? 

Mr. KAMEN. I entirely agree. You have to make it fun. You have 

to make it rewarding. You have to show them superstars that they 

can aspire to be like because that is what drives kids to put passion into things in this country, and we have got to get kids passionate about science and technology and make them believe it is 

available, it is accessible, it is fun, it is rewarding and it is a great 

career. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay. Great. I might add one other idea that is not 

original. I heard it yesterday from the CEO of a tech company but 

it might address some of the concerns about the subjects being either too difficult or not interesting enough or whatever, and that 

is, allow students to basically progress at their own pace so they 

are not keeping up with the class, they are not discouraged from 

taking those subjects, so that might be another consideration as 

well. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yield back. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. 

I now recognize Mr. Kilmer, five minutes. 

Mr. KILMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for 

being here. 

I think this is a very important conversation. I have got 24,002 

reasons to care about this, 24,000 open computing jobs in Washington State right now, and two little Kilmer girls. I have got a 4- 

year-old named Tess and a 7-year-old named Sophie, and Sophie’s 

newest passion is the codable and hopscotch apps on the iPad, 

which teach coding concepts, and she totally geeks out on it. 

Let me start on the 24,000. I just invite you, and maybe I will 

start with Mr. Partovi and invite others to chime in. Be more directive to us. I mean, outside of CSEA, and Dr. Jona, you mentioned 

the potential of trying to have the government promote distribution 

platforms for some of these things. Are there other things that 

Congress ought to do to step up not just to fill the 24,000 jobs in 

my state but to ensure that we have a workforce for the next generation? 

Mr. PARTOVI. Sure, absolutely. You know, I looked at this. The 

core issue in computer science which is driving these jobs is the 

high school pipeline, and the reason the CSEA bill is—you know, 

it is a no-brainer. It only removes barriers, doesn’t increase funding. It does what constitutionally the federal government should be 
91 

doing, which is giving more control to the states, but if you want 

to go beyond that, I wouldn’t say to increase funding but look at 

the existing $3 billion in STEM funding or the existing $1.5 billion 

in K–12 STEM funding, how much of that is going to computer 

science? I would say today almost none of it because in a high 

school when they get STEM funding, STEM means biology, chemistry, physics, environmental sciences and calculus, and I have 

nothing against those things but they don’t even think of computer 

science as a STEM topic. We all think of STEM as robotics, engineering, computer science, coding. That is not what our schools 

think, so the STEM funding you are providing, billions of it, goes 

where the jobs aren’t actually. 

Mr. KILMER. I would invite others to chime in if there are other 

suggestions for Congress. 

Mr. KAMEN. I will give you a suggestion. I know that the two 

sides of Congress seem to be polarized on a lot of issues. I can tell 

you from my day job, I have 500 engineers who work on a lot of 

projects for a lot of big companies, most of which heard about our 

members of FIRST as well. But in my day job, I now have 30 openings. We have been hiring as fast as we can. We can’t find tech 

people just like the rest of these people. I have people here on H1B visas. It costs me a lot of time and a lot of money to acquire 

these people and to get them in. We are happy to pay the money 

because they are so valuable, but of course, I would rather give the 

jobs to homegrown people. 

We know that you have a bill going through that is going to increase the H-1B fees to tech companies. You know, what would 

make that a lot easier for these tech companies to swallow is to 

know that some of that money is being used to solve their longterm problem. If you could say whichever said, hey, it is not even 

a new tax, it is not even new money, take that H-1B fee money, 

put some of it aside to solve the problem so that down the road we 

don’t have to keep doing it this way, and I would suggest that if 

you could take some of that money and make it available to these 

schools so that they can internally leverage all the things you have 

just heard about, the amount of time and money it would take to 

internally build a robotics program to bring in world-class scientists and engineers to be in classrooms, you can’t do it, you don’t 

need to do it. They are there. They are free. Let the schools leverage these programs by just giving them the stipend for the coach, 

the ability to pay the fee to get to the event and figure out how 

to focus that money on the schools that need it most and that way 

you are solving multiple problems. I hope you get consensus. I 

know industry would be way more supportive of paying higher H1B visa fees if they thought it is solving their problem. 

Mr. KILMER. Thank you. With the minute I have left, let me 

ask—let me focus on the two, and that is, Mr. Partovi, you mentioned the failure to see adequate representation of women and minorities in the STEM fields. Again, how do you think the federal 

government is doing in terms of some of its programs to broaden 

diversity in the STEM fields and can you give direction whether it 

be through NSF programs or others to what we ought to do to raise 

our game? 
92 

Mr. PARTOVI. Sure. First of all, what I showed was not about 

STEM, it was just about computer science, because that is my 

focus. The two issues are slightly different. The female participation is a cultural one, girls being—just the culture all around them 

making them think this is not for me, whereas the African American and the Hispanic American issue is much more just availability. There is equal or even greater interest level among African 

Americans or Hispanic Americans in computer science but the 

schools don’t teach it, and that is the bigger problem that I would 

suggest that you guys focus on. The cultural issue, I think efforts 

like FIRST and efforts like Code.org will actually change the culture. The fact that we got 10 million girls learning an hour of code 

last month, that is going to start to have a trickle effect, and we 

are going to do that year after year. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. I now recognize Mr. 

Massie, five minutes. 

Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Kamen, that idea of taking the H-1B visa fees 

and using it solve our problems makes way too much common 

sense for Washington, D.C. I love that idea. 

As a participant when I was in grade school and high school of 

science fairs, I was always frustrated that the science fairs wanted 

a hypothesis, and there was just one iteration of the scientific process. So what really encourages me about what you have done with 

the FIRST program is to teach failure, that it is okay, in fact, you 

are going to fail multiple times in an hour. Even if you write code, 

you run the code and it is going to fail and you find the bugs but 

the same thing mechanically, so I think that is great that it also 

teaches that failure is okay, and it motivates those classroom topics 

like trigonometry. We want those kids to care about trigonometry. 

Why would you care about it unless you could see where you could 

use it? 

But I want to ask you about something I know you are passionate about. You are trying to promote the superstars as engineers. I would think the equivalent of an Emmy or Grammy would 

be a patent. You know, kids in your programs I am sure would love 

someday to get a patent, because to use sort of an engineering 

analogy, you are trying to push a string uphill if you are trying to 

encourage these kids and the parents to get excited about a degree 

or an education in STEM unless there is something pulling the 

string, and what is pulling the string should be that incentive, that 

Emmy, that Grammy, that professional achievement. But isn’t it a 

little counterproductive for Congress as we have recently done to 

advance this narrative of trolls, that if you invent something and 

then you go—and then a big company takes your idea and you try 

and live the American dream and use the justice system and get 

your rights asserted in court that you might be a big hairy troll? 

I would argue maybe we should talk about patent hobbits instead 

of patent trolls. They are a lot more cuddly. But I would like to 

hear your views on Congress’s recent decision to change the patent 

system. 

Mr. KAMEN. So sadly, that is a big topic and it is hard in a few 

seconds—— 

Mr. MASSIE. You can have the rest of my time. 
93 

Mr. KAMEN. I would violently agree with you that A, as an incentive and as a prize, as an Emmy, it has got to stay there. It has 

been very valuable. It is what has led the United States for the last 

couple hundred years to be clearly the global leader in innovation. 

It is not a coincidence that you name it, the Wright Brothers or 

Edison or the Google boys are here. It is not a coincidence. It is 

the lifeblood of America is innovation and the freedom to do it, and 

we had a patent system that supported it, and by the way, we have 

students that do have patents. It is fantastic. We have middle 

school students that have applied for patents through robotics and 

we are—we work with the Patent Office. We have had their director as a key person in our organization over the years. They come 

to our championship. 

But back to the current issue of patents, I think the intersection 

of bad actors, people that are being called trolls, they are conflating 

to the general public the bad actors with the incredible importance 

of the patent system, and I think mostly because of misguided understanding. You know, my guess is most people in Congress understand certain other kinds of intellectual property. Dollar bills 

are an intellectual property. You can’t run your car on them. You 

can’t buy—you can’t eat them. You can buy food or fuel. A deed to 

your home is intellectual property. A credit card is intellectual 

property. We have a society that depends on them. We know that 

there is a lot of credit card fraud in this country but I haven’t 

heard Congress say let us stop letting people use credit cards. I 

know that there are counterfeiters out there, there are bad actors, 

and we should go after them and put them in jail but I haven’t 

heard anybody say let us close the Mint and the Treasury. But because of bad actors that have made, frankly, small levels of outrage 

and inconvenience to people, they have—because there isn’t a 

broader understanding of the power and importance of patents for 

small companies to raise money, for companies to protect themselves internationally. 

I was at the CDS yesterday in Las Vegas watching all sorts of 

Chinese companies parade their little Segway copies around, and 

I am not sure what we can do about it anymore because the United 

States that used to be the pillar of we don’t make compulsory licensing, it was the country that believed in, you can own private 

ideas and private property, suddenly even the debate about how we 

are so drastically undermining the importance and value of patents 

and being able to keep it is, I think, emboldening the rest of the 

world to do what they are doing and this country’s major economic 

future is depending on intellectual property and innovation. This is 

the wrong time to be weakening it. 

Mr. MASSIE. My time is expired, but before we touch the patent 

system again, I would love to have you come back. Would you be 

willing to testify on that subject? Because I think it is important. 

Otherwise we are pushing the string uphill to get these kids to become inventors. 

Mr. KAMEN. My whole company depends on the—I have 500 people. We don’t make or sell a product. We work for these giant companies giving them better solutions for their next products. I would 

go anywhere to testify on this because my company’s future and I 
94 

think this country’s future depends on a strong patent system, and 

calling this a reform is a euphemism. 

Mr. MASSIE. Thank you very much, Mr. Kamen. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Ms. Esty for her questions. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking 

Member, and thank all of you for joining us here today. As a parent of a child who did FIRST, I went to those competitions well before being in Congress and I had a chance to go back last year, and 

I would recommend it to all my colleagues. It is very exciting and 

it really gets you—gets your juices flowing about what is possible, 

and for those who haven’t done it, I would also say bring an astronaut to your schools, which I did in December, and I took them into 

a pilot program in one of my underserved communities into a middle school where half the students were girls, and it was incredibly 

exciting. These astronauts were treated like rock stars, and they 

told stories, and NASA is very good at this, and I would—this is 

the sort of thing we can do because I really want to drill down a 

little bit of what more we can do about the specifics for the underrepresented. 

If you look in a state like mine like Connecticut, I had a caller 

this week from Newtown, Connecticut. He is looking for five programmers right now and he can’t find them, and we have students 

who are graduating and are going to graduate with huge amounts 

of debt and they won’t have jobs and they will be baristas. 

So we really have to think about what we can do and how far 

back do we need to go. Certainly, we need to do it in high schools 

and we need to have those computer science programs, but should 

we be looking even further back? Should we be looking at elementary schools? What are we doing in elementary schools? I have got 

bills out there to try to support teaching in elementary schools because I do think that idea, I am not competent at this, I am not 

good at that, often starts because I have seen it with my kids. I 

saw it in classrooms, and disproportionately, I have to say, minority students and girls were led to believe they weren’t good at these 

fields. 

So I would like you to think about that, and think about the role 

that competition plays, interactive actions where you fail, you try 

again, you fail, you try again, but you keep doing it because it is 

like Angry Birds and it is not like a test. So whoever wants to 

chime in on driving it even before high school the use competition 

and, again, what constructively the federal government’s role be in 

that? 

Mr. PARTOVI. Thank you very much. Well, I talked about the 

Hour of Code, how we got 17 million kids to do that. There are not 

17 million high school kids in this country, so a huge number of 

those, millions, literally, were in elementary school and middle 

school, and we showed them that you don’t even need to be 13 or 

14. There is eight-year-olds, nine-year-olds doing the Hour of Code. 

In terms of diversity standpoint, we had more girls try computer 

science and coding in U.S. schools in December than all kids in the 

history of the United States. We have very much flipped this idea 

that I can’t do it completely on its head, and if we just continue 
95 

to do that, people—as long as they make it fun, which computer 

programming is, we can show kids that they can do it. 

The biggest issue I believe actually is not the cultural one. I 

think the biggest issue is the access and especially among the 

underrepresented minorities, the fact that computer science, the 

schools that do teach it are suburban schools. They are not urban 

schools, they are not rural schools, so the underprivileged kids 

don’t even have access. 

Ms. ESTY. Mr. Kamen? 

Mr. KAMEN. So again, we are in violent agreement that you have 

got to get their attitudes adjusted at a much earlier age. Otherwise 

they can’t get on the train. It is moving too fast when they get to 

high school, and again, our sports model has been incredibly effective. We started it in high school but the proof that it works and 

it is a ground-up effort is the popular demand was, we need to 

have the equivalent of Little League because there is a World Series, there is college and then there is high school and junior varsity. Within five years of starting FIRST, which is now 20 years 

ago, there was such demand among the parents, ‘‘What am I going 

to do for the younger brothers and sisters that come and watch this 

thing.’’ So we didn’t form a Little League, we formed Lego League, 

and the Lego company has a huge operation in Connecticut. The 

Chairman of Lego flew over from Bilund, saw what we were doing 

and said I will give you your Little League. We now have tens of 

thousands of teams, and we not only have Little League now, to 

your point, we have junior FIRST Lego League for the kindergarten on up, and it is a continuum now driven by the demand created by the superstar mentality of this whole thing. 

And one more comment about NASA. You talked about bringing 

astronauts. Just so that you all know, NASA—yes, I have Boeing 

with hundreds of teams and every aerospace giant and every pharmaceutical giant and every semiconductor industry company, they 

are all there, hundreds and hundreds of them, but the largest single source of teams for FIRST is NASA because all their facilities 

around the country supply mentors, they supply grants to underserved schools. Their Administrator, Charlie Bolden, came and was 

our guest speaker at our championship, and the kids love NASA 

and space and technology. They love it all if you don’t make it intimidating. So NASA has been a great partner. If you could find 

a way to get other government agencies that have technology people to get involved, it would be great. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you very much, and I am out of time. Thanks. 

Chairman BUCSHON. All right. Thank you. 

I recognize Mr. Schweikert. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and forgive the 

buzzers. It is just one of those things that goes on around here. 

And forgive me if I am—Mr. Partovi? You just said you don’t believe it is cultural, but Mr. Kamen about 20 minutes ago said it 

was, so I want to see the two of you debate each other. 

Sorry. Some of us have sort of perverse senses of entertainment. 

But I really would like to back up a theme that both the right 

and the left here have touched on and then backed away from. Is 

there something cultural in our sense of expectation? We all—let 

us face it, most of us in this room, particularly those with gray 
96 

hair, think back to when we took our calc and trig and those things 

and it hurt. It was painful. Now, when I couldn’t do the homework, 

I didn’t want to go to school the next day because there was always 

that freaky smart kid that made fun of us. Sorry for anyone in the 

room, MIT with a bunch of patents. 

And yet I am told today that the United States, the only thing 

we score the top of the world in is self-esteem. Have we done something perverse to our next generation and the generation after that 

culturally and saying it is not always warm, fuzzy and teddy bears 

and puppies. It is hard—it is hard work. It is going to be painful, 

and guess what? That is how you get there. And that is why I am 

looking for consistency in thought where someone says it is cultural, it is built into our expectations of each other and avoidance 

of pain, and it isn’t. What is it? 

Mr. PARTOVI. I would like to clarify what I said. I actually completely agree with you. The country has a cultural sort of impediment. People don’t think I should work hard and get an A plus, it 

is geeky to be an A student, you would rather make it onto the 

football field than be the kid with lots of books and you know, the 

smartest kid in the room. What I was trying to say is that with 

computer science, there has been an additional cultural impediment of just oh, my God, it is all ones and zeros, I will never, ever 

be able to touch that thing, and people place in their minds computer science and programming as this thing that is harder than 

trigonometry, harder than calculus, way out there, and what I 

think we can easily prove when you see that 8-year-olds can do it, 

and not just one 8-year-old but millions of 8-year-olds, at least that 

one piece, which is disconnected from reality, gets more grounded. 

But we still need to have a culture that celebrates the successes, 

treats, I guess, engineers and scientists as rock stars and teaches 

Americans that you have to get A’s to be cool. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Well, speaking of rock stars, the gentleman to 

your right, I mean, Mr. Kamen, you’re touching and working with 

a lot of these young people. It is my vision of sort of cynicism that 

our avoidance of what is difficult, our constant concern about people’s self-esteem is an impediment to the understanding of this is 

reality. Reality sometimes is hard. 

Mr. KAMEN. So once again, I am in violent agreement with you 

including the guy next to me. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Could we avoid the word ‘‘violent’’? 

Mr. KAMEN. I am in substantial agreement with you, Congressman, and I would tell you, first of all, one of our taglines at FIRST 

is always, it is the hardest fun you will ever have, and we then go 

on to point out to these kids, you are going to fail, we have given 

you a job that you can’t possibly do with the limited resources and 

limited time we have given you to have to work in complex groups, 

you are going to fail, but that is a microcosm of the real world for 

people that eventually succeed, and we literally then go on to tell 

them all that stuff as you pointed out, we say, you know, why do 

you learn trigonometry, why do you learn all these things, you 

have never had a place to use them. You are going to quickly find 

yourself trying to do something that without understanding arithmetic and algebra and trigonometry and some calculus, you are not 

going to have the tools to do well, so we make it relevant but we 
97 

make it fun, and as another place I substantially agree with you, 

we allow them to fail, to learn from those failures, and we say to 

them, you know, in sports you go out and you started with tee ball, 

the ball didn’t move but you had to see a path. And then we say 

to them, in sports, if you didn’t get it, you have a chance tomorrow. 

You don’t get a grade, you don’t get a D, you get a coach that nurtures you, and we are going to put you in teams where you can be 

failing and failing and failing but learning and learning and learning. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. I was trying to go to something that is much 

more cultural, and I know, Mr. Chairman, we are up against time, 

and for Mr. Cornwell [inaudible]—down the food chain of education 

in our society, and so I know we are out of time, Mr. Chairman, 

but I don’t know if we will get another round. Thank you for your 

patience. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Dr. Bera. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Ranking Member Lipinski, and thanks to the witnesses. 

Mr. Kamen, I enjoyed the video as well as the sports analogy. 

You know, as somebody who grew up with a pretty good outside 

jump shot, I think it became evident in about 8th grade that I 

wasn’t going to be Jerry West or Wilt Chamberlain. Fortunately, 

though, in the public schools I went to, I had teachers that believed 

in me and pushed me and, you know, I excelled in science and the 

life sciences and went on to medical school and a doctor. 

But they were allowed to meet me where I was and they were 

allowed to push us and encourage us to imagine and dream and 

think, and as I toured—you know, being a professor at a medical 

school, associate dean of a medical school, I spent a lot of time looking at what we are doing in K–12 as well as undergrad and grad 

school, and much of what we are doing in the STEM fields is 

memorization and regurgitation, and we really need to expand and 

get back to imagination, you know, to encouraging folks to solve 

problems and teaching our kids at an early stage not just to memorize and regurgitate but to think. Coding allows you to do that, 

right? I mean, coding and, you know, the innovation labs. You 

know, in my district, Intel has a major presence and, you know, 

what they are doing. When I talk to the Project Lead the Way kids, 

they are allowing them to imagine. It doesn’t have to cost a lot of 

money. It has to, you know, allow us to change a curriculum, 

though, that is very much testing-based. And it’s not that easy to 

test computer science or test on a multiple choice test imagination. 

You know, I had wood shop, metal shop, auto shop, you know, and 

you had to do mathematics in a very different way in those, and 

you had to dream of a project, put it on paper and make it happen. 

You know, I am glad that Mr. Partovi is here. You know, last 

month I visited Toby Johnson Elementary School in my hometown 

of Bell Grove in my district and watched these kids, 7th and 8th 

graders, doing their Hour of Code using your curriculum. Again, 

not a lot of money, not a lot of investment, just a desire and a recognition that this was important. 

I guess my question to any of you on the panel is, how do we 

start changing the curriculum to allow that imagination cur-
98 

riculum, that innovation curriculum to take place at an earlier 

stage? Because we have got to do it in the elementary schools and, 

you know, we have got to push imaginations. 

Dr. JONA. Well, I think we have seen a number of questions 

around this theme. I think if the science and math classrooms in 

our country look like FIRST Robotics, we wouldn’t have to have 

this conversation because we would see how much fun kids have. 

Unfortunately, if you look at most math and science classrooms, it 

is a very sort of punitive, assessment-driven, risk-averse environment for kids, and that is not an environment where science and 

engineering thinking, or even CS thinking, can really happen. And 

so, you know, it is very antithetical to the spirit of engineering, as 

we have heard Mr. Kamen say over and over, you have to try, you 

have to fail. But kids when they come home from school and, you 

know, my four kids are the same way, failure is a bad thing and 

failure is something that you avoid at all costs because once it hits 

your GPA, it is all over and then your, you know, college career is 

over and whatnot. So it is a systemic issue that, you know, has to 

do with the culture of assessment and sort of the punitive nature 

of school, and it turns a lot of kids off to harder subjects, quote, 

unquote, because they are afraid to try because it is hard and they 

are going to fail. 

Dr. CORNWELL. May I make one other comment on that? I think 

it is critical to have teachers who are content experts who have the 

ability to let the class go in different directions. If the teacher 

doesn’t feel comfortable with the material, they are probably going 

to be very rigid on how they do that. And the current pay structure 

doesn’t allow necessarily for different pay for computer scientists 

who could, with a bachelor’s degree, get a job for $100,000. Why 

would they go into teaching? It is a very challenging value proposition, but I think we need teachers who are content experts that 

can truly get students excited because teachers can have such an 

incredible impact on students. 

Mr. KAMEN. And to be somewhat of an optimist here, I am not 

sure you have to change the whole curriculum, and that is sort of 

our point as to why FIRST works. Kids are not going to bounce the 

ball for three hours a day because you put it in the curriculum and 

tell them to do it. They will do it 45 minutes once a week and 

some—but they will go out after school and do it seven days a week 

because they are inspired to do it. 

We don’t claim that the NBA is part of curriculum but we have 

a culture that says to these kids, ‘‘do it.’’ And as you pointed out, 

you can do it after school and fail a lot and fail a lot and get a few 

of those shots in and keep going because you didn’t get a quiz; you 

didn’t get a test. It is a perfect environment to encourage people 

to fail and get better. 

So using the same analogy, we say—and we have heard people 

up there say—kids don’t want to learn trigonometry because it 

seems really hard and, more importantly, it has no value. In the 

curriculum, leave it alone. The schools will do a great job. That 

gym teacher will do a great job of teaching kids the basics. They 

will go out and become experts because of their passion. You still 

need those analytic skills. You need to learn arithmetic and geometry and trigonometry, but you are only going to really learn them 
99 

well if you have some motivation to use them after school when you 

really develop the skills. 

So by that same now-tired sports analogy, I will tell you let the 

curriculum do what the curriculum is supposed to do: give them 

the basic tools, not by memory, but give them the basic tools. That 

is analysis. But synthesis is taking all those tools and doing things 

with it. Bouncing a ball is work. Playing basketball is fun. You do 

one because of the other. They don’t have a ‘‘because of the other.’’ 

Particularly kids in underserved communities don’t have a ‘‘why 

am I doing this’’ answer. If you let them have FIRST in and around 

their culture and their community, they are going to need to learn 

to code because their robot won’t move without it. They are going 

to need to learn algebra or they can’t figure out voltage and current. 

If we can meld the fact that schools ought to have a curriculum 

that is analysis-based, teach them everything that came before us, 

but then give them opportunity to use synthesis to create new 

imagination, all of that stuff should be working hand-in-hand, not 

one or the other. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much, Dr. Bera. 

I now recognize Mr. Collins. 

Mr. COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank all of you. And I am intrigued with a couple of 

thoughts here, and I am going to maybe direct these more to Mr. 

Partovi and Mr. Kamen because it is obvious to me that both 

FIRST and Code.org are existing without federal funding. This is 

the private sector and entrepreneurs and those that really care 

about the future of our country doing what you are doing, and 

thank you for that. 

So my comment is, as a new Member of Congress, I came here 

with a core philosophy that big government generally doesn’t have 

the answers. And in Congress, all too often, especially when you 

look at the debate on the right and the left, there are those who 

think government can solve all the problems. 

We are here in Congress—and some of the questions have been 

directed to you, what can we do in Congress? Part of my philosophy 

is nothing, that education starts with parents. And especially as we 

talk about feeding the pipeline, the K–12, parents care about their 

kids’ future. It is the parents’ job to make sure—go to the local 

school board. The local school board is hiring the teachers and setting a curriculum that works. And that school board answers to the 

taxpayers and ultimately you go to the state. Last, you go to the 

federal government. I don’t think we should be involved in this 

education debate. What you are doing doesn’t have any Federal involvement. I would say the answer is the parents motivating the 

school board. 

And I am someone that has lived this. My son went to a high 

school that did not have Regents Diplomas. As a result, they didn’t 

teach to the test. And by not teaching to the test, they could exceed 

everything the public high school was doing. So when it came time 

to graduate, he is now an electrical engineering student at 

Villanova with a minor in mechatronics. He won the physics competition, he won the SumoBot competition and came in second in 

the Trebuchet pumpkin-throwing competition. It was all about 
100 

fun—throwing pumpkins, SumoBots crashing together—but it 

didn’t come from the federal government. I don’t think it can come 

from the federal government. I think it comes from parents pushing a school board and perhaps at the state level. And I just would 

love to hear a few comments from Mr. Partovi and Mr. Kamen. 

This philosophy of mine is we are here asking. I don’t think it is 

our job. 

Mr. PARTOVI. So I would agree with you in terms of the philosophy, and it is—you know, constitutionally I would say, you know, 

the federal government doesn’t have that many strings it can pull 

to mandate things at schools or parents. But I have one thing I 

would suggest that I have a slight disagreement with my colleague 

in that computer science currently isn’t even in the curriculum 

and—— 

Mr. COLLINS. Well, excuse me. What if we didn’t have a core curriculum? 

Mr. PARTOVI. So that would be one way of achieving it, but the 

issue we have right now is that the federal government—— 

Mr. COLLINS. And I agree with you. 

Mr. PARTOVI. Yes. The federal government does decide—right 

now, it does specify in the ESEA this is the curriculum in a way 

that actually excludes computer science. 

Mr. COLLINS. Right. And that is why we shouldn’t have it. 

Mr. PARTOVI. If you could abolish the ESEA you might get to a 

certain place, but whatever it takes to allow the schools—we have 

had one million parents petition via us. One million parents have 

signed a petition saying we want this in every school. They go to 

their school board and then their school board says, well, you 

know, we have this federal government funding that comes this 

way but it defines the curriculum this way. 

Mr. COLLINS. Unintended consequences. 

Mr. PARTOVI. Yes, but either way, we need to at least remove 

what I consider federal government barriers to schools actually responding to the parental pressure that they are receiving today. 

Mr. COLLINS. It is the least we could do. 

Mr. Kamen? 

Mr. KAMEN. So I will say I don’t think we are in disagreement. 

I believe that schools need to have way more access to computer 

technology in general, and kids through those schools need to get 

their earlier taste of it at a much lower age. So I think we are in 

agreement there. And I think he is in substantial agreement with 

you that creating systems—government by definition is high inertia. It is big. It takes a long time to change. That is generally good 

because organized societies don’t like chaos and they are afraid of 

change. So the things that you want to be big and stable, government is okay. 

Nothing is changing faster than the world of tech, and within the 

world of tech, nothing is changing faster than code. So they are not 

keeping up, to his point, and they should get out of the way of trying to mandate at the micro level for sure. 

I only have then two comments for you. One is I need your son’s 

resume because we are desperate for more good mechatronics guys. 

Send him my way. He sounds like interesting young man. But I 

think another place where government should come in is to make 
101 

sure there is a fair playing field. I mean that is what I think governments are really about. And these days, you can’t expect a kid 

to compete in a fair way if he gets into—or out of high school or 

drops out of high school without certain kinds of skills. It is pretty 

clear your son was not at risk of not developing—— 

Mr. COLLINS. Right. 

Mr. KAMEN. —those skills, but there are plenty of families in this 

country or communities in this country that don’t have the resource 

or even awareness or good judgment to go demand changes—— 

Mr. COLLINS. Right. 

Mr. KAMEN. —in schools, so there is some place for the government, which is, as I keep saying, don’t run this program. We don’t 

want you to run this program. The last thing we need is you to 

help us make FIRST part of curriculum. But make sure the schools 

that have that teacher or that principal that is ready to say we 

have got to leverage this incredible program—— 

Mr. COLLINS. Um-hum. 

Mr. KAMEN. —make sure they are encouraged to do it and have 

the resources to do it. 

Mr. COLLINS. No, thank you. Just to add, you know, because you 

do brag about your kids, my son is going to do his junior year internship in Tel Aviv working for the Israeli Space Program. 

Mr. KAMEN. And I will tell you I will be over in Tel Aviv on 

March 2 where we are having a massive FIRST event. It is their 

ten-year anniversary. Shimon Peres is presiding over it. FIRST has 

a higher percentage of the schools in Israel involved than we have 

in the United States. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Ms. Kelly. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, witnesses. 

As I have sat here, my questions have changed over and over 

and over listening to all of my colleagues, and I will admit that I 

fall right into that stereotype. I ran away from science and math, 

and it was scary to me. But I think you hit the nail on the head 

as far as access and opportunity. 

I represent the Chicagoland area starting, you know, if you know 

Chicago, 53rd by U of C going south, so most of my district is suburban and rural and they don’t have the opportunities, they are 

shaky. 

In some of my area’s school boards. We have worked to bring updated computers to the high schools and to the elementary schools 

so the kids even have, you know, something to work on. So that 

is where I see government being the safety net, and it is not fair 

and equal at all, not even in the Chicagoland area if you compare 

the south suburbs to the northern suburbs and—because of how we 

fund schools and property taxes and on and on and on. And if we 

don’t do something about that, I don’t think we will ever be fair 

and equitable. 

We started—I came in in April, special election, a STEM council 

and a STEM academy, so I have tech people and different people 

around the table with community colleges to see what we could do 

as far as changing the curriculum and what jobs are out there and 

what training people need. And then I go to different areas in my 

district and actually expose the kids. I took them to the Museum 
102 

of Science and Industry, had them meet different people, had people come to them, tech people come to them, but, you know, we 

service 750,000 people and it is—you know, so I go to one school, 

then another school, then another school, and what did the kids 

say? Are you coming back next Saturday? Or, can we do this? And, 

no, I can’t. I have to keep, you know, taking turns. So we are trying 

to get our businesses involved in even adopting schools so they 

have some, you know, steadiness or some constant, you know, in 

their lives to keep them interested. And—so I say that. 

And also the other thing is, you know, I have a doctorate so I 

definitely believe in education, but many of my manufacturing companies and advanced manufacturing companies, they say part of 

the issue is we go to school and we major in psychology like I did 

and then we can’t find a job, and they feel that if kids graduate 

with the tools they need and get two-year certifications, they can 

get really good jobs, too. And I just wanted to know how you felt 

about that. 

Dr. CORNWELL. I would just say I strongly agree with you. Not 

everyone needs a college education. We hear the same thing in Indiana as far as advanced manufacturing. For students who get a 

great technical education, there are wonderful jobs. So, I don’t 

think everyone needs to go to college. I do think college is more 

than just job training, however. It really is a life-growing experience, but I do think it also should end with a job and meaningful 

employment. But I agree with—— 

Ms. KELLY. And not $80,000 in loans you can’t pay back. 

Dr. CORNWELL. Well, that is right, or even $5,000 if it doesn’t 

lead to a job. To me, our students at Rose-Hulman may have a 

higher debt, but they all get very good-paying jobs; so it is a good 

investment. 

Ms. KELLY. Um-hum. 

Mr. KAMEN. They are all looking at me, but I think I am having 

a disproportionate time here. 

I would tell you that you say you, you know, ran away from it. 

Obviously, you have a Ph.D. You didn’t run away from education. 

Ms. KELLY. Right. 

Mr. KAMEN. I think, and I will just keep saying it, and it is not 

a disagreement, I think our culture certainly takes kids, particularly women and minorities and—at a very young age and puts in 

front of them people they can relate to from the world of sports and 

the world of entertainment. And the reason I think we agree is I 

think we have got to get to them very young and have them as passionate about developing skill sets that will lead to great jobs 

whether it is out of college or a tech job. But once you get them 

passionate, you have got to deliver the tools they need, and it isn’t 

putting pins into frogs anymore. Everything he is saying is the 

skill sets—once we can turn them on to say I can do this stuff, 

whatever this tech stuff is, the tools you have got to give them 

have got to be 21st century tools to do the right stuff. 

And again, I will say it is not an either/or. The schools have to 

have curriculum. They have to have all the things that—you guys 

have to solve that problem of where the money comes from and 

where it goes and property taxes. But more than that, you could 

give the schools everything they want. And when I first started 
103 

FIRST, I wanted our tagline to be, you know, ‘‘you can lead a horse 

to water but you can’t make him drink.’’ I wanted it to be ‘‘you can 

lead a kid to knowledge but you can’t make him think.’’ And what 

I wanted to do was say get the schools as good as they can be, and 

that is your collective problem. I don’t know how you do that. But 

it wouldn’t matter if you had the best schools in the world if it is 

a 50 percent dropout rate because the kids would rather do something else. 

So let’s get the schools to have the right tools and let’s let the 

culture of America, the companies of America, the people that need 

these kids give them the right kind of inspiration to work hard at 

developing the muscle hanging between their ears. It is the only 

one that has unlimited potential. And the kids that need to know 

that most culturally are the kids you are talking about, and you 

should find ways to get the schools that you have been visiting to 

get some teacher to be a coach, to get on a team. We have the companies that will connect them. You need to get the superintendents 

to know that having afterschool passion-based activities that matter to the future of these kids and to this country are as important 

as the other activities, and that is an appropriate role of leadership. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize Mr. Hultgren. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for 

being here. This has been a very interesting, very helpful hearing. 

One of my biggest frustrations with this place, Congress, is the 

busyness of it, and here we are talking about what I think is one 

of the most important subjects we could possibly be talking about 

and there is just a lot of other things going on. You hear beeps and 

buzzes and things, and that references the other activities, votes, 

committees, whatever, that we are being called to. I am so frustrated by that. I wish we could have this hearing in front of the 

entire Science Committee but also in front of the entire Congress. 

I think it is so important. 

If you talk to Members of Congress, every single one would say 

one of our top priorities has to be STEM education, that if we are 

going to be an innovative nation, we have got to be a nation that 

is committed to STEM education. But how do we make that happen? And I think that is where we struggle. You hear it up here 

is what is our role? And finding that right balance of what is the 

best way to motivate, mentor, and educate our students, specifically in STEM education, so that we can have a bright future as 

a nation. We are struggling with that. We need your input. We 

need your help. 

I also am—have enjoyed this so much but really am looking forward to the next panel of young people, which is really, I think, 

the—where the excitement is of seeing that from them. I talk to 

scientists. I represent Fermilab and have some wonderful physicists and they get so excited talking to other people about science. 

That challenge we have is, again, what is our role as government? And I think it is telling the story and taking away impediments, you know, of things that will allow young people to get excited and to be able to make the most of these opportunities. That 
104 

is what we have got to do and finding every possible way to get 

rid of unfunded mandates that aren’t doing anything to excite our 

kids but are taking away opportunities from them to pursue their 

real passions and real opportunities there. 

I want to thank Dr. Jona from Northwestern. You all have done 

a great job working with my staff and great job in Illinois working 

to bring STEM resources to local districts. I also want to just, you 

know, give a thanks and a shout out to Mr. Partovi and also to Mr. 

Kamen on a couple different fronts. One: last month, I went with 

my 12-year-old and 9-year-old and—to do an hour of coding in 

Elgin. We went to Elgin Technology Center, and I did the Angry 

Birds Hour of Code and was successful. I was able to maneuver 

and code my way through an hour and loved it and was really encouraged. And the lesson for me out of that was if I can learn how 

to do this, anybody can learn how to do this. 

I am serving on this Committee but don’t have the pedigree that 

some of my colleagues have in these areas, but I really did see an 

excitement there, and what I was most excited about was my kids 

who were with me and how excited they got, my 9-year-old and my 

12-year-old, of doing this. And also my mentor in this process was 

a 13-year-old, who is on the robotics team in Elgin. ‘‘Got Robot?’’ 

is the robotics team that went to St. Louis last year, great team. 

They are—this kid is—the whole team is phenomenal. I am so 

proud of them, but they are so excited. And my 9- and 12-year-old 

also got to meet with the Got Robot? team to see their latest robot. 

But with it, what I was really excited about was they brought 

their brothers and sisters along, little brothers and sisters, who are 

doing the Lego robots. And boy, my 9- and 12-year-old were kind 

of intimidated by the robot, but then they saw the Lego robots and 

they said we can do that. That wouldn’t be that hard. And they 

could start seeing, okay, now I see how this works together, that 

we can do this. 

So I just want to commend you for what you are doing, and we 

want to be helpful. A couple of things just in the minute I have left: 

there are some challenge in this, too, is how do we—you know, one 

of the things I recognize is we see a lot of people who are going 

to college to pursue this and then are dropping out, maybe some 

for right reasons to pursue a career, others because they just didn’t 

see it as what they thought it was going to be. So I just would ask 

what can we be doing to encourage people who should be staying 

in this to stay in it? Are there more internships, mentorships, other 

relationships that we can be encouraging or building that will help 

people who really are our best and brightest staying in this? Certainly, we want to do it on the early side, and I think FIRST is 

doing a great job at this. Code.org is doing a great job of this. But 

what else can we be doing to make sure young people who should 

be in this, stay in this? 

Mr. PARTOVI. I would like to say a few words that actually address your questions and some of the previous comments. You 

know, there was this conversation about kids don’t like trigonometry, they don’t like calculus, they don’t like tests, and what we 

have showed and you saw with your own kids is that kids like 

making apps. They like making cool stuff. And, you know, with respect to the role of the federal government, without the federal gov-
105 

ernment’s help we have managed to get this into tens of thousands 

of schools. And in fact, even at the elementary level, even in rural 

schools in one month our curriculum that you saw, a 20-hour-long 

course is already in almost 10,000 schools at almost no cost with 

no funding other than what I have managed to raise. 

But the most important role for you guys I believe, however you 

want to do it, is to remove the barriers. And the goal I would think 

of it is basically put the ‘‘T’’ into STEM. When you think of STEM, 

your mind goes to us, the types of things we represent, but when 

you talk to a school about STEM, what they think about is predominately life sciences and math and maybe physics in between 

and the technology part isn’t even there. And I showed you on the 

chart that more than 50 percent of STEM jobs are in computer 

science. Dean talked about the H–1Bs. More than 50 percent of H– 

1B visas are for computer scientists, but in our K through 12 system, STEM and the funding that comes to STEM and the definition 

does not include computer science. That is—that should be something that the federal government can play a role in because currently it does actually provide barriers. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Yes. My time is up. There is so much more that 

I would love to talk with you all about. I really would echo that 

we would love to have you come back and have some more focused 

testimony on this and get other committees engaged and involved 

in this. I am a cosponsor of the Computer Science Education Act, 

which is a small step in the right direction but there is so much 

more we can be doing there to recognize how important that is. 

The last thing I will do is—will say is how important parents and 

teachers are. I just feel like that is the linchpin on this. So much 

is—I see so many parents who are intimidated by this and teachers 

who are intimidated by this, and anything we can be doing for 

them to see this is a great opportunity for your kids to have a great 

future and maybe change the future. And so Got Robot?, for example, this robotics team in my area, happens to be a homeschooled 

team, and so those parents are incredibly dedicated to their kids’ 

education certainly, but also to that team, and it pays off such rich 

dividends, which I just was so inspired by and my own kids were 

inspired by as well. 

So thank you all. I wish we had a lot more time but also looking 

forward to hearing from students who are engaged in this. With 

this, I yield back. Thanks, Chairman. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. 

Without objection, the Chair recognizes Ms. Edwards for five 

minutes. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and to the Ranking 

Member. I really appreciate your allowing me to sit in on this Committee. This is not my Subcommittee. 

I wanted to just sort of talk to you because I come to this from 

a couple of different places. And, Dean Kamen, when you visited 

my son’s school, Capitol Hill Day School, when he was in 8th 

grade, I know for him and all of those of students, it was very inspiring. And it wasn’t that they were necessarily going into or 

studying those fields but it gave them a different avenue and approach to the work that they were doing. 
106 

And I was a student—when I was a student, I had a great aptitude for science and math at all of the higher order sciences and 

math, and I wouldn’t say I was discouraged from going into those 

fields at higher ed, but I was not actively encouraged, and as a result, I didn’t. And it wasn’t until after high school, after college, 

and a different direction that I happened upon Lockheed Engineering. I got a job there. I ended up first doing, you know, analysis 

and writing and software testing and then development that I discovered that in fact I did have a very practical aptitude. 

And so it worries me that sometimes we are—you know, we are 

in a situation now where we don’t necessarily discourage students 

but we have to have more encouragement for students who may 

not think of that as their first choice because they may not have 

the parents at home who understand that or who are, like a lot of 

parents, intimidated by all of those higher order sciences and 

maths. 

And then as a worker in the sector, we—at Lockheed we wanted—a lot of the companies that were doing business at NASA 

wanted a relationship with the school system but it was so incredibly difficult. When could our engineers be in the classroom? Could 

they only be in there for an hour or two a day? Could the students 

come to our facilities, all of those things, and we are still working 

out some of those kinks in terms of the relationship with the private sector that gives a much more practical vantage point of how 

to do work in and with our school systems. 

And then, lastly, as a Member of Congress, every year I do a college fair. We invited—this last year, we had about 165 or so colleges and universities. And the focus of that is we bring in employers as well to do demonstration projects around STEM fields. We 

actually had a computer coding project that was run by one of our 

local companies, and, you know, each one of them participating because it helps for students to say where is it that I am going? What 

is the direction I am proceeding in? And then we had the National 

Association of Black Engineers, and so for the first time—my district is majority African-American—that these African-American 

students who are going to the college fair could actually see engineers who look like them, who are doing projects with them, so 

that they could see a direction they were going in. 

And so I just share that with you because I don’t think it is one 

thing or another thing, and I think sometimes the federal government has to set a floor but it can’t be the be-all and end-all. And 

in our next panel we are going to hear from two students who come 

from counties that I represent in a State where we have said we 

can’t just have one science or technology school; we have to have 

that kind of learning taking place in all of our schools. And it is 

a real transformation from the time that I was at Lockheed and 

out at Goddard to where we are now. 

But I just—I applaud you for the—for what you shared with us 

but I also know that the private sector is going to have to step up 

and work with our schools and our institutions of higher learning 

so that we are getting a better match of people who are coming out 

with degrees and the kind of work that is done in the workplace 

because we have such a mismatch now that it is the reason that 

you have to struggle with those H–1B visas. And God love those 
107 

people who are coming in to our companies, but it is because we 

have a terrific mismatch between the students we are producing, 

the skills that they have, and the workforce needs, and we have to 

marry those up. 

And I just—I close my comments because I really came here for 

our second panel, but I applaud what you do and I hope, Mr. 

Chairman and to the Ranking Member, that in Congress we can 

see across the aisle to begin to get this right from a policy perspective in the Congress. And I thank you for being here. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

Now, without objection, the Chair recognizes Mr. Kennedy for 

five minutes. 

Mr. KENNEDY. I will be quick. I promise. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

I appreciate that. I appreciate the opportunity. 

To the witnesses, thank you for indulging yet another Member 

that is not on this Subcommittee but is on this Committee and has 

great interest in this topic. Thank you all for being here. 

I wanted to build a little bit off of my colleague Congresswoman 

Edwards’ question or point I guess. I am very interested and actively engaged in a number of STEM initiatives in Massachusetts 

and through the work of this Committee. One of the challenges I 

have seen in Massachusetts is a bit of the mismatch that Ms. Edwards pointed to, but a demand from the private sector to provide 

more talented engineers and scientists, computer scientists. But as 

we try to structure what that actually is and looks like, our reluctance of some in the private sector to recognize that this is—to look 

at STEM and STEM initiatives as a long-term investment in their 

own business and business model rather than a short-term corporate philanthropy initiative that, given a bunch of iPads or a 

school field trip or something and taking a photograph and sending 

that out in their newsletter, that is how it is approached more so 

than a strategic overall development of an overall strategic plan. 

And I was wondering if you could give any recommendations to me 

or to this Committee as to how to get the private sector more involved in some of these long-term efforts? Whoever wants to take 

it. 

Mr. KAMEN. Well, for one thing, as you have heard a number of 

times, I think a lot of the problem is not to do anything; it is to 

stop doing things that are counterproductive and get rid of hurdles 

and barriers that might have made sense when we were an industrial society. You needed rows of student lined up and seeds here 

and then they take the summer off to, you know, bring in the 

crops, which I am sure a lot of them are doing today. 

But the idea that, for instance, a scientist, a Ph.D. in mechanical 

engineering, can’t go into a school because they are not qualified 

to teach, that is fine. We don’t want to create an issue there, but, 

for instance, let the students get credits for being on FIRST programs. Let them get college credits. We know the colleges are desperate for our graduates and our alumni. Find ways to take down 

the barriers that we have historically had between industry and 

schools, make it easier for the teachers to get credits for being involved with industry and learning how to bring coding into the 

school. 
108 

I mean there is so much structure which, again, makes—you 

know, inertia is a difficult thing to overcome, but knocking down 

barriers and creating the right incentives and—I will keep saying 

it—just showing up and cheering for kids that are doing something, 

it—you can’t underestimate—you said you weren’t actively discouraged but you look at how many other things were stealing your attention, the co-mission as opposed to the omission. I think you were 

actively discouraged because of so much else in our culture that 

was sending you to different places for different reasons. You were 

lucky, but there are a lot of kids in this country that are going to 

get past an age where they can develop the skill sets for these 

great jobs because they were distracted by a whole lot of nonsense. 

And government can help get rid of some of that nonsense. 

Dr. JONA. Yes. I would just add, you know, there is a broad 

range of incentives that the private sector has to invest in R&D 

and build plants and bring in jobs. It might be worth considering 

some incentives to foster that long-term thinking that you are talking about, whether it be tax credits or other kinds of incentives. It 

could be anything from as simple as providing summer teacher internships at businesses so that they can keep current with engineering and scientific practices or coding practices. You know, a lot 

of the small startup companies are way too small to afford to host 

these internships like larger companies do except that is where all 

the excitement and activity is these days. 

So I think there are some creative opportunities to incentivize 

business participation, you know, over the long haul. As you said, 

it is a self—partially self-interested workforce development issue, 

but it could benefit our STEM education. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you. 

Mr. PARTOVI. If I may answer, you know, I agree with you that 

many of the efforts you may see from large companies are either 

trying to just hire the next engineer or trying to, you know, hire 

high school immigrants or do a laptop giveaway to take a photo opportunity, but we have actually built a very strong coalition of 

some of the top tech companies thinking long-term, and they are 

investing in elementary school education, which isn’t going to pay 

them back dividends. It is paying the country dividends. 

And just to give you a sense, we may be one of the only nonprofits that can claim Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, 

LinkedIn, SalesFirst, Juniper, all collectively participating not in 

small levels but Google put—changed their logo for the Hour of 

Code. Apple put it into every single store in the United States. 

Microsoft and Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg delivered video lectures for us. Amazon hosted our infrastructure. These are all very 

long-term investments in changing the system, and these companies actually want to form a public-private partnership to bring 

computer science to all of America’s schools. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you and I yield back my negative time. 

Chairman BUCSHON. You didn’t have any time left. 

Well, I would like to thank all the witnesses. And also we didn’t 

talk about it much today but I do think the retention issue of students that do initially go into STEM is a big deal, and there is 

some—I am a big Gladwell fan and his most recent book ‘‘David 

and Goliath,’’ he talks about the fact that the mismatch between 
109 

the student and the school, which school that they choose, is important in that area. If the student chooses a school that doesn’t 

match them either challenge-wise or otherwise, they have a tendency to drop out and feel like they are not—they can’t compete. 

And so school mismatch is a big problem. 

But I would like to thank all the witnesses. The Members of the 

Committee will have—may have additional questions for you and 

we will ask you to respond to those in writing. The witnesses are 

excused from this part of our hearing. We are going to take a very 

short break. If everyone that can stay seated, please do, because we 

are going to try to transition as quickly as possible to the next 

hearing. 

Thank you very much. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman BUCSHON. All right. We are glad to begin our second 

panel. If everyone could be seated, we will proceed. 

This is going to be a fascinating part of the hearing because we 

are actually going to hear from those for whom STEM education 

is most important, and that is the actual students. 

Thank you for being here. I know it may not have been easy to 

get permission from your parents and teachers to come, but I think 

when you told them you were going to testify in front of Congress, 

maybe they gave you a little latitude, and obviously you are here. 

We know that not every program gets every student excited, but 

we are interested in learning from your experiences and perspectives whether it is through FIRST, Code.org, VEX Robotics, Project 

Lead the Way, the Science Bowl, or something else. 

Our first witness for our second panel is Ms. Ellana Crew. Ms. 

Crew is in the 12th grade at South River High School in 

Edgewater, Maryland. Our second witness is Mr. Brian Morris. Mr. 

Morris is in 12th grade at Chantilly Academy in Chantilly, Virginia. Our third witness is Mr. Daniel Nette. Mr. Nette is in the 

11th grade at George Mason High School in Falls Church, Virginia. 

And our final witness is Mr. Vishnu Rachakonda. Mr. Rachakonda 

is in the 12th grade at Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Greenbelt, 

Maryland. 

Our witnesses should know that spoken testimony is limited to 

five minutes after which the Members of the Committee will have 

five minutes each to ask you questions. Your testimony will be included in the record of the hearing. 

I now recognize our first witness, Ms. Crew, for her testimony. 

Welcome. 

TESTIMONY OF MS. ELLANA CREW, 

12TH GRADE, SOUTH RIVER HIGH SCHOOL, 

EDGEWATER, MARYLAND 

Ms. CREW. Thank you, Chairman Smith, Chairman Bucshon, 

Ranking Member Lipinski, and Members of the Committee. I am 

a little different than most of the other kids here for two reasons, 

one being I am legally blind, not fully blind but not fully sighted, 

caught in the middle, also because I am actually not going into a 

STEM career, but it still definitely has changed a lot and encouraged lots of things for me just being a part of FIRST. I have never 

been able to play sports. I couldn’t see well enough to do it and I 
110 

was always, you know, your immediate target for dodgeball in all 

my classes. They went out of their way to try and I was always the 

first one out. So sports were never a thing, games were hard. Lots 

of other activities were always difficult. 

And I first heard about FIRST through a friend of mine who was 

on the team and her sister was as well. They had been doing it for 

a while. And the way she talked about it, it seemed like such a 

great atmosphere and it seemed like a really good opportunity, so 

I applied for the next year and got into it on the business side. 

And once I was in, after a while, I just got adjusted and you meet 

all kinds of people. You see all kinds of things and progress. It is 

very interesting to see. And, I mean, robots are cool. But there is 

a place for everybody really. I didn’t have to worry about being 

judged for anything. I didn’t have to worry about whether or not 

I could do it. I could not work on the robot directly or anything, 

so I couldn’t be on build because I couldn’t quite see well enough 

to do that, but there is—you can certainly been involved. And when 

you watch it happen, it is really, really very cool. 

That is all I have to say. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Crew follows:] 
111 
112 
113 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. It is a fascinating 

perspective that you don’t have to be interested in a STEM field 

to benefit from a STEM education and what it can offer students 

in all areas of whatever their interests are. 

I now recognize our next witness, Mr. Morris. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. BRIAN MORRIS, 

12TH GRADE, CHANTILLY ACADEMY, 

CHANTILLY, VIRGINIA 

Mr. MORRIS. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Members of the Committee. 

I am a veteran FIRST member with my involvement spanning 

seven years and several programs offered by FIRST such as FLL 

and FRC. FIRST has been an integral part of my development as 

a person, as a student, and as an aspiring engineer, and it has 

challenged and trained me in ways normal classroom schooling 

never has. And because of FIRST, I feel more prepared to face the 

challenges and obstacles of the real world than I ever imagined I 

would. 

My involvement with FIRST dates back to the 7th grade when 

five of my friends and I decided to give robotics a try through 

FIRST Lego League. While I originally thought of FIRST programs 

only as games to play for entertainment, I soon realized they were 

so much more. FIRST isn’t just about the competition. It is also 

about the life and learning experiences of being on a team, working 

with technology, solving problems, and inspiring others to do the 

same. This is really what got me hooked on FIRST: competing, 

learning, and having fun all at the same time. 

I couldn’t say what my favorite part of FIRST is. There is really 

so much I have enjoyed. I have had the chance to work on longterm projects, seeing them go from the drawing board to physical, 

finished products, which is my favorite part of engineering. I have 

learned invaluable technical skills, as well as how to manage and 

lead large groups. The FIRST community puts the program above 

any individual goal or interest, and it is overwhelmingly helpful 

and supportive thanks to the principle of gracious professionalism. 

The outpouring of passion and enthusiasm at FIRST events is truly 

refreshing, and watching the enthusiasm of so many young people 

for science and technology gives me hope for the future. 

FIRST has helped me discover my passion for engineering, and 

because of FIRST, I can definitively say that I want to pursue electrical engineering and computer science as a career. I have applied 

to several top engineering schools in Virginia and the Nation, and 

I hope my experience with FIRST will give me an edge up in admissions. But no matter what university I end up at, I am sure the 

skills I learned with FIRST will serve me well in my studies and 

beyond. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Morris follows:] 
114 
115 
116 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. And I am sure they 

will. 

I now recognize Mr. Nette for his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. DANIEL NETTE, 

11TH GRADE, GEORGE MASON HIGH SCHOOL, 

FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 

Mr. NETTE. Thank you, Members of the Committee. 

I first learned about FIRST from my older brother, who was a 

founding member of Team 1418 at my school in 2004, making this 

our 10th year. He—I—he currently serves as the tournament director for a FIRST Lego League tournament held at our local middle 

school. 

Unlike many of my science and mathematics classes, FIRST provides the opportunity to apply hands-on solutions to real challenges. As we compete—complete the challenge, we also learn valuable skills like team building, communication, leadership, and especially the four elements of STEM. Through the program, I have refined my ability to seek my own solutions to problems and develop 

my own desire to learn. Working with robots has helped me learn 

about idea development, material properties, pneumatics, metalworking, and motors by applying concepts that I learned in the 

classroom to a real life problem. FIRST gives us a challenge each 

year and then we go through the process of brainstorming, designing, prototyping, building, and of course rebuilding multiple times 

until a working solution is achieved. In addition to the processes, 

the pressure of a six week time constraint to complete the task at 

hand, I know I will encounter these deadlines and utilize these 

problem-solving skills in my future career. 

Many students involved in the program experience for the first 

time the importance of interaction and communication with adults 

such as mentors and judges. While that was not a problem as so 

much for me because of my experiences in becoming an Eagle 

Scout, I discovered the power to spread the ideas of FIRST at a 

dinner conversation last year with a family friend who became very 

interested in the program. She invested in a Lego robotics kit and 

took it on a mission trip to a school in Rwanda so that the students 

there could begin to learn about robotics. She then went on to serve 

as a judge at a recent FLL tournament and hopes to become a 

mentor in the near future. 

As a student, I have always had an interest in mathematics and 

science but it wasn’t until the last few years, through my experience with FIRST, I realized that I would like to pursue a career 

in STEM. I plan to apply to Virginia Tech and hope if accepted to 

be able to work with robots to solve real-life challenges. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nette follows:] 
117 
118 
119 

Chairman BUCSHON. Excellent. Thank you very much. 

I now recognize our final witness, Mr. Rachakonda. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. VISHNU RACHAKONDA, 

12TH GRADE, ELEANOR ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL, 

GREENBELT, MARYLAND 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. Thank you, Chairman Bucshon, Ranking 

Member Lipinski, and other Members for being here and listening 

to my testimony. 

My name is Vishnu Rachakonda. I attend Eleanor Roosevelt 

High School. I am in the 12th grade. Actually, we have a significant number of students from Ms. Edwards’ district herself. My experience with FIRST is that I started with FLL in the 7th grade 

just like Brian, and I spent four years in FRC now. And I just have 

to say my fellow students touched a lot—very well on the educational aspects and values of FIRST, and I would just like to talk 

a little bit about my personal story. 

I think with FRC, especially FIRST in general, I described it in 

three ways: spirited, challenging, and fun. I am a basketball fan, 

I am a football fan, I am a tennis fan, so I love, you know, hearing 

everyone talk about basketball here and seeing Chris Bosh on the 

screen. But for me FRC has been so spirited, so different from 

every other educational activity I have been to. There is a subculture behind it. There is, Dean Kamen—Mr. Kamen, he is my 

James Naismith. Woodie Flowers, the guy who comes up with the 

challenges behind it, all the mentors who do it, they are my 

Lebron, they are my Kobe. They are the people who are my role 

models with respect to engineering, and I think that is very unique 

to FIRST and in general to these kind of STEM activities. 

I think that FIRST—the challenges that are before me have 

pushed me to engage these fields—these STEM fields differently 

and more thoroughly than anything I have ever done in class. I 

took AP Physics B, I took AP Physics C, I have done all these AP 

classes, and I have gotten the grades, but being in FIRST, I can’t 

say I am the best engineer in my club because I am not. I have 

gotten higher grades than the best engineer but Kyle beats me at 

being an engineer. So I think that in challenging me, it has been 

very unique and more different, and I think that is very valuable. 

And finally, it has been fun. I think we have all alluded to how 

being fun, I think, is critical in engaging students in STEM and 

whatever—in STEM and these fields. And FRC has certainly done 

that and FIRST programs have certainly done that. I think importantly the fact that we get to interact with these professional mentors has made a huge difference in my own life. You know, I work 

with Mr. Healy, who is here, you know, with me today, and I think 

that these people have become role models, you know, in pursuing 

an engineering career and then also giving back to the community. 

I think that FRC has made a personal change in me on that level. 

I would just like to tell a short story about how I have come to 

appreciate FIRST more. Recently, I went to Japan on a trip to 

present some original research, which I hope to come back to, but 

original research. And at that conference for high school students 

it was—you know, there is something called World Premier Research Institutes in Japan. They are modeled off American univer-
120 

sities and how we have phenomenal research institutions. They are 

doing the same thing in Japan to try and replicate what we do. 

And when I was there, they were asking me what do you guys do 

in school? What do you guys—you know, what is it that you do that 

allows you to do such good research? Because we are presenting 

unique research that Japanese high school students there were not 

capable of doing, not for lack of intelligence but for lack of facilities, 

for lack of support. And when I told them about FIRST, about what 

we did, about how we manage a $25,000 budget, how students 

build these 120-pound robots, they were absolutely flabbergasted. 

I mean these were top scientists but they were saying kids can do 

that? Are kids smart enough to do that? What? But the point was 

that it allowed me to appreciate FIRST and the programs that 

these—you know, these unique private sector STEM programs are 

engaging in. You know, Code.org, all of our students on our FRC 

team, they learn coding through Code Academy, through Code.org, 

all these websites, and it is really opening up new avenues for us. 

So, you know, I guess hopefully three things that I guess maybe 

this discussion would include would be teacher support, which I 

think Mr. Kamen was talking about extensively. I think it is very 

difficult at my school to get people—to get teachers to support programs. I had to—Science Bowl, you mentioned that. I need to find 

a new sponsor for my Science Bowl team this year because my old 

teacher said she couldn’t do it this year, and it was hard I mean 

because teachers just said I have so much work. I have so much 

work in terms of testing or whatever it is that they weren’t able 

to be, you know, sponsors or whatever. So hopefully, you know, 

some way teachers can be, you know, more focused on—or allowed 

to sponsor these kind of private sector STEM programs like FIRST 

because it all starts with the school, and if you don’t have that 

school support, no team can survive. 

You know, internships and stuff like that, I think real world experience, practical STEM experience like FRC, like internships are 

critical, and I think that, you know, up here, Dr. Jona was talking 

about GPA and stuff like that. I think it comes back to college admissions. I think that is an important aspect to this STEM engagement for students. And, yeah, I just—on a personal note, I plan to, 

because of FIRST, major in biomedical or electrical engineering 

when I get to college. I don’t know where yet but hopefully I will 

learn by the end of March. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rachakonda follows:] 
121 
122 
123 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you for—all of you for your testimony. I am not sure at your age that I could have testified that 

well in front of Congress. Truly—and I still can’t. Thank you, Mr. 

Massie, for pointing that out. 

Fascinating to hear from the students, and I want to remind the 

Committee Members the rules limit questioning to five minutes. 

And at this point I will recognize myself for five minutes to ask 

some questions. 

Ms. Crew, in your testimony you noted that your—the focus on 

the business side of FIRST. Can you tell me about what the business side entails as part of an FRC team? 

Ms. CREW. The business side kind of—they do a lot of work. 

There is all kinds of sub teams. We do—we manage all of the—like 

the awards that we enter, Chairman and—everything. The graphics especially is a huge part of the business side. I am on community service personally, which we—you know, we reach out. We donate; we do whatever we can to help. But there are multiple sub 

teams and they all have a really big part in it. I don’t know where 

we would be without graphics. I don’t know. We probably wouldn’t 

have won anything without the awards team. It is a very large, intricate, complicated thing. I don’t know if all teams are run like 

that, but at least mine is. It is a very good system. 

Chairman BUCSHON. And, Mr. Morris, do you want to have a 

comment about that? 

Mr. MORRIS. Yes. I would just like to elaborate on the less technical aspect of the team. A lot of these teams, mine in particular, 

are run like a corporation. There is a leadership structure and 

there is a product that the team produces that is a robot, but there 

is also all the support that goes into running an organization. So 

you have funding people. All of these teams are self-funded. They 

don’t get funding through the school, so we have people who have 

to go out. They have to seek corporate sponsorship. They have to 

find mentors if there is no infrastructure in place to help get the 

mentors. And all of this is done by students. So even non-STEM 

people—I—as the executive of my team, I have not just engineers, 

I have marketers, I have business people, I have graphics design 

and website people. And these are all people that you need to run 

a FIRST team, so it is not just about the engineers even though 

that is obviously the focus, but we say this to people when we are 

recruiting for the team. There is a place for anyone no matter what 

your skill set. If it is public speaking or writing or anything, there 

is a place for you. And that is kind of the—what the business side 

is about. 

Chairman BUCSHON. That is fascinating. 

And I will start with Mr. Rachakonda on this next one. Have the 

activities you participated in during the robotics club, the FIRST 

competitions, changed your approach to your other schoolwork? 

And as a follow-up, have the activities changed how you think 

about problems or challenges outside of school? 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. Yes. I definitely think that, you know, that 

these challenges have really—Mr. Kamen talked about how synthesis—analysis and synthesis. I think that I have taken stuff from 

FRC where I have learned about certain robot parts or have 

learned about certain technologies and—or, you know, coding or 
124 

whatever it is and I am able to understand that and cross-apply 

it to whatever I am doing in school. So, you know, we have technology classes in school. I am cross-applying what I learned in 

FIRST, what I learned in FRC to what I am learning in technology. 

And, you know, the—being in FIRST has allowed me to be in 

multiple internships, research-focused internships. From those research-focused internships I am now cross-applying that to in class, 

you know, we have to produce a research paper by the end of the 

year as part of the program that I am in. You know, you are in 

an internship and then from there you produce a scientific paper. 

And so some of the skills that I have learned from FRC in terms 

of time management, whatever it is, technical skills, I am able to 

apply that in that respect. So, yes, there definitely is a mixing between those two. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Mr. Nette? 

Mr. NETTE. From what I have experienced with FIRST, I have 

been mostly kind of a nuts-and-bolts guy if you will doing most of 

the physical work on the robot, and that was what inspired me to 

get into the computer science classes that we have at our school 

was because I wanted to learn more about how you make those 

things do what they are designed to do. And so definitely what 

FIRST has planted the seed for me to learn more about what it is 

all about, how you make things work. So it got me started and now 

I am seeking my own route outside of FIRST through my classes 

to learn more about the rest of things, and hopefully, I can come 

back to FIRST with my new knowledge and help possibly with the 

programming. Thank you. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Excellent. 

Mr. Morris, how has—the things that you were learning in 

FIRST, has that changed your perspective on your other schoolwork or your activities outside of school? 

Mr. MORRIS. It hasn’t so much changed the perspective I would 

say but it did—what I have learned in FIRST I have definitely 

been able to apply outside of school as with what my fellow witnesses were saying. FIRST takes up a lot of your time and you 

have to learn how to manage that time. You have to learn how to 

prioritize, and as well from being the leader of the team, I have 

learned how to lead people. These FIRST teams, they are volunteers. You can’t fire them if they are not doing their job. So how 

do you motivate these people and engage them? And that is something that is not just—I can’t just apply to FIRST but I can apply 

to science fair or any other group project where students—how do 

I get these people motivated? That is a big part of it. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Ms. Crew, do you have comments on that 

subject? 

Ms. CREW. It definitely does affect your time management I 

think most of all since you are there—once the season starts, you 

are usually there pretty much almost every day of the week. So you 

have to figure out when you do your homework and all the other 

things. That is about all I have to take from it though since I am 

not quite involved with the computer science aspect of it so—— 

Chairman BUCSHON. Okay. Thank you, everyone. 

I now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Lipinski, for his questions. 
125 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say that 

all of you, your testimony has been extremely impressive. I sit here 

and I think that when—well, now that Mr. Massie is gone, I can 

say this. You have probably put all of us—we all sitting up here 

probably look and say if only I were that good when I was that age. 

I can certainly say that for myself. But obviously, you all have 

great opportunities ahead of you for whatever you want to do. And 

I am sure if there are any parents out there, teachers out there, 

you have to be extremely proud of your child here. And I am sure 

Mr. Kamen sitting there is—has to be extremely proud. 

I taught college before I was elected to Congress, but it is just 

very impressive what you have been able to do, and I just encourage you to keep it up. Obviously, you have put in a lot of hard 

work. 

Mr. Morris, you talked about the hours. How many hours do you 

spend—did you spend on FIRST? 

Mr. MORRIS. FIRST—the FIRST season is structured a lot like 

a sports season, so, first of all, we have our off-season and so that 

is we are preparing for our season. It is—that is—it is hard to kind 

of estimate how much but I would say at least three hours a week 

at least, and sometimes there will be big spates of work where we 

would be off at an outreach event, we will be volunteering for, you 

know, eight to ten hours a day. 

And then we get to the build season, which is when we construct 

our bot, and that is—at least on my team that is four to six hours 

every day after school as well as eight hours on Saturday, and that 

increases over the duration of the build, over the duration of the 

six weeks. And after the build, a few months later we go kind of 

back into preparation mode, and then we have got our competition 

and competitions are three days of very intense 24/7 work basically 

but also they are a lot of fun. So that is just kind of the summary 

of the hours. I don’t know if some of these other teams work differently, but that is how my team works. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Anyone else want to comment on—Mr. 

Rachakonda? 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. Yes. On average I would say I probably spend 

10 hours a week on FIRST-related activities, on robotics club-related activities. And the work never stops. You know, they say, you 

know, like football never stops or whatever. You are still working 

on an off-season. You are still working on an off-season for FIRST. 

We have a team calendar the entire year. Every month we have 

to have something done. You know, June through August we have 

to manage—that is when we really try and set up our plan for the 

next year. That is when we want to get our corporate sponsorships, 

and that is ideally when we want to get everything rolling in because January through March we have to build our robot. And, 

trust me, nothing else is happening until the robot is done. So, you 

know, November through December we have to train our new 

members, we have to teach them programming, teach them how to 

use the skills. Safety training has to be done because we are working with power tools. 

So, yes, there are a lot of different aspects to it which I think 

is one of the most unique things about FRC. It is not just about 

the robot but you really are running—you know, I like to call it the 
126 

world’s toughest corporation because all your talent is gone in four 

years, everyone is volunteer, and the people who are leading it are 

all volunteer. And so it is very unique and that is what I think is 

very important about it. I guess my other students can also talk 

about that. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Anyone else want to—Mr. Nette? 

Mr. NETTE. I would violently agree with everything that has 

been said here. It certainly takes—— 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Didn’t you learn not to use that word here? 

Mr. NETTE. It certainly takes a substantial amount of time, but 

yes, in the off-season you definitely have lots more time to go into 

the outreach aspect of FIRST, which is just as much a part of it 

as the build season is. It is about helping other people, gracious 

professionalism. Even during the build season we will help with 

other teams. We take a few under our wing and sometimes help 

them get started. So, yes, it is definitely a great experience and it 

doesn’t end at the end of build season, but it definitely picks back 

up. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Is there anything that—what can be done? Is there 

anything we could do, anything you could do what—in terms of encouraging more students to get involved? And I want to start with 

Ms. Crew because you obviously—you are coming at this—we are 

talking about all this technical, you know, stuff about the robotics 

and you are involved in a different part of FIRST. So is there anything that can be done to encourage more people—more kids to get 

involved? 

Ms. CREW. I think it definitely needs to be in more schools and 

it needs to be more—there needs to be more awareness about it. 

There is not nearly enough, you know, information on it. You know, 

at school they will always do announcements about what your 

sports teams did and reminding you to come out to the game and 

all that, and robotics is kind of—it is like an accidental secret. Nobody really has heard of it unless you have—you know somebody 

in it most of the time or we do something really incredible and it 

is on the announcements. So I think it definitely needs to be 

more—the word needs to be spread. 

Mr. MORRIS. Yes, I don’t think that is really the fault of the 

teams. I think you have heard people mention outreach a lot. 

Spreading the message of FIRST is something that Dean is big on 

and the entire organization is big on, but like just trying to get access to the gym to use our robot to get like—not to demean the 

sports teams at all, but to have the same kind of formality with 

the school is certainly something that would help you because we 

certainly think that this is just as important. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Rachakonda? 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. I am sorry, just briefly. I think unknowingly 

or like whatever, it used to be that STEM and these kind of things 

were niche activities. They were just something that, you know, 

maybe in the ’70s people would build train tracks, but that is not 

what it is anymore, you know, sample, model train tracks. But now 

it has become an athletic activity at least in the model of FRC. We 

have 50 students on our team. That is not your usual club. We run 

a budget of $25,000. That is not your usual club. 
127 

And so that is where I think that if there was more awareness 

in terms of how to deal with these kind of STEM activities and recognizing this is not just another academic activity, this is not just 

Quiz Bowl, which I am also a participant in and it is great, but it 

is not just Quiz Bowl. It is something different and we need to recognize that and how we treat it. And, you know, Mr. Partovi was 

talking about how we treat computer science and everything, but 

in terms of activities, too, when you do realize that, that it is quite 

different. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. All right. Thank you very much. 

Chairman BUCSHON. I now recognize Mr. Hultgren for five minutes. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you all for being here. And I just want to commend you 

for really going above and beyond. That—to me, that is really kind 

of the story of your work is this is above and beyond, an incredible 

commitment but also an incredible opportunity. And I really sense 

that, that you recognize what a great opportunity you have been 

given. 

A couple questions I have, one is I wonder if you could just talk 

briefly about how your parents first responded when you mentioned that you were interested in doing this and when you started 

talking about I guess some of the responsibilities, maybe driving or 

whatever that would be involved for them. How did they respond? 

We can just kind of go down the line or whoever wants to speak 

up. 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. Well, my mike is already on, but, yes, I 

think—well, for me at least, even from getting started in engineering and getting started in STEM, my entire family is, you know, 

in a STEM field. My dad is an engineer, my grandfather was an 

engineer. All of them went to West Virginia University actually, interesting, but I think that my parents were definitely very supportive of how I have approached this. And my dad, you know, he 

also—he is involved in a tech company or whatever and he has 

given me advice on how to approach running—because I am the 

president of my club, how to approach running, you know, whatever I do in FRC, whatever I do in FIRST. And so my parents have 

definitely been very supportive of it and I think that is what makes 

the difference for successful FIRST teams, successful FRC teams. 

You always see parent engagement, and I think that is something 

that is very important for, you know, the success of STEM programs especially because they can be very expensive and they can 

be very time-consuming. 

Mr. NETTE. Of course my parents were very excited that I was 

ready to join the robotics team. At the time, our high school started 

in the eighth grade, which it does no longer. But—so I started on 

our FRC team in the eighth grade. That was the year where the 

game was Logo Motion, and at the end of the game there was a 

challenge to have a mini robot that would climb a pole at the end 

of the match as fast as it could, and so we kind of—the rest of the 

team graciously let us—let the eighth and ninth graders, who were 

trying to get into the swing of things, handle the mini bot challenge, and so that was kind of our own undertaking and we worked 

through that problem on our own. 
128 

So, yes, I just kind of jumped right into it and hopefully in the 

near future we are trying to start a FTC team in our school district 

so that the student at the middle school don’t necessarily have to 

wait until high school because there is that gap between FLL and 

FRC. 

Mr. MORRIS. All right. There is a philosophy among FIRST— 

some FIRST teams that adults are only there to sign the checks, 

but in my experience you can’t run an organization like this without parents. They not only have to be supportive—my parents are 

very supportive—but they also have to be involved and they have 

to—I think the biggest part of that is having them understand the 

advantages FIRST has for these kids because when these kids are 

spending four hours a day, six hours a day, eight hours on weekends working at the school and their parents are just like, what? 

What are you guys doing? What are you getting out of this? So the 

teams can—we can talk at the parents about, you know, what are 

the advantages of this? Why do you want your kids doing this? But 

I think it gives more credence to the—it gives more kind of weight 

to the argument when other adults are telling the other adults this 

is why this is important, this is why you should be not only happy 

but supportive of your kid for doing this because there are people 

on the team whose parents don’t want them to be in FIRST, and 

I think that is really quite sad. 

Ms. CREW. My family had some kind of mixed emotions for a 

while. My mom was not happy about it taking up so much time 

during the build season because you are there basically every single day. We have Wednesdays off at my team but every other day 

you are there and longer on weekends than the other days. So she 

wasn’t exactly happy about that and it is very time-consuming and 

she didn’t know how I was going to get there. My dad, though, he 

was pretty interested in it. He thought it was really cool so he kind 

of helped convince her of it. And he actually got involved in it, too, 

as a mentor. He is now the documentation mentor at our team, so 

he just drives my sister and I—my sister is now on the team, too— 

to it every day and it generally kind of works. 

Mr. HULTGREN. That is great. If I could, any parents who are 

here, if you don’t mind just raising your hand, any parents? 

Thank you. I know it is a huge commitment and I just want to 

commend you for your involvement and engagement. 

I would love to get into more talking about mentors as well. Certainly, parents are part of that but also some of the other mentors 

that you have mentioned, certainly some who are in the room, 

some who have joined with you today. But I saw that so clearly 

with my team Got Robot? back in my area that relationships and 

the commitment of mentors, giving so much of their time and not 

getting paid, if they are paid, really not much at all, but seeing this 

vision of pouring into you the opportunity that they wish they 

would have had when they were your age, and that is really, really 

cool. 

So I would ask are they any mentors in the room as well? 

So thank you all so much for your commitment as well of being 

mentors. That is amazing. 

One of my fears is that we see with challenges we are facing in 

Congress some of the cuts that are coming are to the Department 
129 

of Energy, to STEM education mentorship programs, and we have 

got to do everything we can to fight against that. That is exactly 

what we need more of is more mentorship. And when—especially 

when we see teachers being so stretched or maybe not even having 

the passion or the desire to put in this time commitment, yet a 

mentor is willing to do that, some teachers certainly willing to be 

mentors as well, but this is something I want to continue to focus 

on and make sure that the funding is there for that and we do everything we can to encourage this. 

So thank you. I just am inspired by the work that you are doing. 

Thank you, parents. Thank you, mentors. And anything you all can 

be doing and that we can be doing as Members of Congress just 

to be spreading the word of how important this is and how much 

this makes sense. 

I will wrap up if I can, Mr. Chairman, just by talking about Mr. 

Rachakonda—is that right—talked about going to Japan. It sounds 

like an incredible experience—but how they are modeling what we 

have done, my fear is that we are going to lose that cutting-edge 

that we are really the place that is—the rest of the world looks to 

as the innovative nation. And there are so many other nations that 

are ready to do that, and I think STEM education and programs 

like FIRST are absolutely key for us of what type of nation are we 

going to be in the next 5, 10, 20 years. I want to make sure that 

we are continuing on that forefront, that we are the nation that 

every other nation is looking to to see how does America do it and 

then let’s follow what they are doing rather than falling behind, 

and that is my fear. 

Thanks, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you. Without objection, the Chair 

now recognizes Ms. Edwards for five minutes. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Ranking 

Member. And again, I really do appreciate your enabling me to sit 

in today. 

I am here today principally because two of the students are from 

the counties that I represent, and I feel very proud of the work that 

we are trying to do in our school systems to enable this kind of 

learning. But I am curious from each of you what aspects of your 

academic curricula during the school day contribute and how does 

it contribute to what you are doing in your club activities? 

Mr. RACHAKONDA. Well, I think that definitely—that, you know— 

I mean it is a STEM activity at heart, right, and I think that definitely my physics curriculum, everything I do in chemistry, all 

these different things are definitely—have helped me in understanding what goes on. I think that, you know, some of the advanced classes that I have taken have helped me understand what 

goes on at the heart of these robotics very clearly, and I feel that, 

you know, they were talking about the curriculum earlier, and I am 

not well versed enough to say anything to pass judgment on those 

curriculum, but I feel that I have learned a lot in school that has 

been useful in FIRST, and I felt the same way vice versa. So, you 

know, the subject matter is the subject matter and maybe in different schools it is being taught differently, taught worse, taught 

better, whatever it is, but I think that at heart for me that the aca-
130 

demic subjects are very applicable in FIRST and all these STEM 

activities. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you. 

Ellana, I wonder if you could share with us—because you are in 

a different part of the aspect of the program—the parts of your academic work that facilitates what you are doing with FIRST or not? 

Ms. CREW. Mine doesn’t actually have a whole lot of contribution. 

I am in just standard classes. I was never in STEM. I was hardly 

ever allowed to really be in honors because like the special ed department was worried that I wouldn’t be able to handle the workload and before like tenth grade they were kind of right. I didn’t 

have the greatest work ethic. But I do sometimes need a lot of people work, so I guess the way they have you work together does kind 

of help. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you. Either of you—of our other two panelists? 

Mr. MORRIS. A lot—the—I will have to—actually have to say that 

a lot of like the physics and the calculus we learn in school, you 

don’t get a chance to like—what you are doing in FIRST is—it is 

more hands-on, so sometimes you have trouble like kind of rectifying the—reconciling the—what you have learned in school, what 

you have learned in FIRST, but it is like—I don’t see any—there 

is—I don’t think there is like a better way of doing it than FIRST 

because FIRST—what you have in school is you have your curriculum. What you have in FIRST is you are hands-on, and those 

things aren’t mutually exclusive but FIRST teaches the hands-on 

I think better then, you know, school ever possibly could. 

Mr. NETTE. The math and science classes of course prepare us 

somewhat for what you are going to do on FIRST, but in math 

when you take a test or something, they tell you what equation you 

have to use to solve the problem, but when you are doing this in 

the real world, you have to figure that part out yourself also. You 

have to figure out what equation to use, then which numbers to 

put where and all that. Being a junior I haven’t gone into some of 

the more advanced math and science classes yet, but on another 

note, one of the things that our team is trying to do this year is 

to engage some of the students from aspects outside of STEM like 

the English students and the history students, too, because there 

is of course functions that they can do on our team. There are 

awards that you have to write essays for and all accounting and 

all that, so economics classes and everything play into it. So we are 

trying to reach out beyond STEM and have some position for everyone in all the classes on our team. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you. I want to just get to one thing. Our 

earlier panel talked about this idea of failure, and it is a thing that 

I have been kind of wrapped up in since I have been in Congress 

because I think sometimes we don’t put resources into things because something fails and then you experiment with it. Can you all 

share with us what you have done that failed that you learned 

from and the value of that? 

Mr. MORRIS. I will actually—I will start on this. The first game— 

the competition—you are designed to fail. They give you way too 

many requirements with way too little time, and so you are going 

to mess up. I am sure every team here has had, you know, robots 
131 

that maybe didn’t have—you know, didn’t perform as awesomely as 

they had hoped because—but it is really—the core of the engineering challenge of FIRST is not just building the robot, it is 

prioritizing to say, all right, what aspects of this are we going to 

concentrate on and how are we going to concentrate on that? And 

if you fail, then—I mean you just—it is not like—this is FIRST. 

This isn’t a—real life and so you—this is a place where you can fail 

and learn from your failures without the consequences being too 

heavy. 

Chairman BUCSHON. Thank you very much. 

Thank you for all of our witnesses. Again, as Mr. Massie pointed 

out, you have probably done a better job testifying in front of Congress than maybe I would. I have four kids and I have found this 

to be one of the most fascinating hearings I have ever attended. I 

mean that sincerely. So I would like to thank all the witnesses for 

your very valuable testimony. 

And the Members of the Committee may have additional questions for you and we will ask you to respond to those in writing. 

The record will remain open for two weeks for additional comments 

and written questions from the Members. 

At this point, the witnesses are excused and the hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:55 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(133) 

Appendix I 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS
134 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS

Responses by Mr. Dean Kamen 
135 
136 
137 

Responses by Mr. Hadi Partovi 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 

Responses by Dr. Phillip Cornwell 
143 
144 

Æ