89–006

107TH CONGRESS REPT. 107–134 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 1

NATIONAL MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIPS

ACT

JULY 11, 2001.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of

the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. BOEHLERT, from the Committee on Science,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 1858]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.

1858) to make improvements in mathematics and science education, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report

favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill

as amended do pass.

CONTENTS

Page

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

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 16

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 16

IV. Summary of Hearings ................................................................................. 20

V. Committee Action ........................................................................................ 21

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 22

VII. Section-By-Section Analysis (By Title and Section) ................................. 24

VIII. Committee Views ........................................................................................ 31

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 42

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 43

XI. Compliance with Public Law 104–4 (Unfunded Mandates) .................... 44

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 45

XIII. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 45

XIV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 45

XV. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 45

XVI. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 45

XVII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported ....................... 45

XVIII. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 47

XIX. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 47

XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence .................................................. 49

XXI. Proceedings of Subcommittee Markup ...................................................... 51

XXII. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup .................................................... 128

2

The amendment is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Mathematics and Science Partnerships

Act’’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds the following:

(1) 12 years ago the President of the United States convened the Nation’s

Governors to establish common goals for the improvement of elementary and

secondary education.

(2) Among the National Education Goals established was the goal that by the

year 2000 United States students would be first in the world in mathematics

and science achievement.

(3) Despite these goals, 8th graders in the United States showed just average

performance in mathematics and science in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat and demonstrated lower relative performance

than the cohort of 4th graders 4 years earlier.

(4) The United States must redouble its efforts to provide all of its students

with a world-class education in mathematics, science, engineering, and technology.

(5) The American economy has become the most robust in the world, not

through state planning and government intervention, but through the hard

work and innovation of its citizens. This success is founded in our Constitutional tradition of respect for individual liberty to pursue personal career objectives.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act—

(1) the term ‘‘Director’’ means the Director of the National Science Foundation;

(2) the term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the meaning given such

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

(3) the term ‘‘eligible nonprofit organization’’ means a nonprofit research institute or a nonprofit professional association with demonstrated experience delivering mathematics or science education as determined by the Director;

(4) the term ‘‘local educational agency’’ has the meaning given such term in

section 1401 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.

8801(19));

(5) the term ‘‘State educational agency’’ has the meaning given such term in

section 1401 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.

8801);

(6) the term ‘‘elementary school’’ has the meaning given that term by section

14101(14) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.

8801(14)); and

(7) the term ‘‘secondary school’’ has the meaning given that term by section

14101(25) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.

8801(25)).

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

Any authorization of appropriations in this Act shall be considered to be in addition to amounts otherwise authorized or appropriated for the National Science

Foundation.

SEC. 5. MATCHING REQUIREMENTS.

The Director may establish matching fund requirements for any programs authorized by this Act except those established in title IV.

3

TITLE I—MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE

EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS

Subtitle A—Mathematics and Science Education

Partnerships

SEC. 101. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants to

institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations (or consortia

thereof) to establish mathematics and science education partnership programs to

improve the instruction of elementary and secondary science education.

(2) Grants shall be awarded under this section on a merit-reviewed competitive

basis.

(b) PARTNERSHIPS.—(1) In order to be eligible to receive a grant under this section,

an institution of higher education or eligible nonprofit organization (or consortium

thereof) shall enter into a partnership with one or more local educational agencies

that may also include a State educational agency or one or more businesses, or both.

(2) A participating institution of higher education shall include mathematics,

science, or engineering departments in the programs carried out through a partnership under this subsection.

(c) USES OF FUNDS.—Grants awarded under this section shall be used for activities that draw upon the expertise of the partners to improve elementary or secondary education, or both, in mathematics or science, or both. Such activities may

include—

(1) recruiting and preparing students for careers in elementary or secondary

mathematics or science education;

(2) offering professional development programs, including summer or academic year institutes or workshops, designed to strengthen the capabilities of

existing mathematics and science teachers;

(3) offering innovative programs that instruct teachers on using technology

more effectively in teaching mathematics and science, including programs that

recruit and train undergraduate and graduate students to provide technical

support to teachers;

(4) developing distance learning programs for teachers or students, including

developing courses, curricular materials and other resources for the in-service

professional development of teachers that are made available to teachers

through the Internet;

(5) offering teacher preparation and certification programs for professional

mathematicians, scientists, and engineers who wish to begin a career in teaching;

(6) developing assessment tools to measure student mastery of content and

cognitive skills;

(7) developing or adapting elementary and secondary school curricular materials, aligned to State standards, that incorporate contemporary research on the

science of learning;

(8) developing undergraduate mathematics and science courses for education

majors;

(9) using mathematicians, scientists, and engineers employed by private businesses to help recruit and train mathematics and science teachers;

(10) developing a cadre of master teachers who will promote reform and improvement in schools;

(11) developing and offering mathematics or science enrichment programs for

students, including after-school and summer programs;

(12) providing research opportunities in business or academia for students

and teachers;

(13) bringing mathematicians, scientists and engineers from business and

academia into elementary and secondary school classrooms; and

(14) any other activities the Director determines will accomplish the goals of

this section.

(d) SCIENCE ENRICHMENT PROGRAMS FOR GIRLS.—Activities carried out in accordance with subsections (c)(11) and (12) shall include elementary and secondary school

programs to encourage the ongoing interest of girls in science, mathematics, engineering and technology and to prepare girls to pursue undergraduate and graduate

degrees and careers in science, mathematics, engineering or technology. Funds made

available through awards to partnerships for the purposes of this subsection may

support programs for—

4

(1) encouraging girls to pursue studies in science, mathematics, engineering

and technology and to major in such fields in postsecondary education;

(2) tutoring girls in science, mathematics, engineering and technology;

(3) providing mentors for girls in person and through the Internet to support

such girls in pursuing studies in science, mathematics, engineering and technology;

(4) educating the parents of girls about the difficulties faced by girls to maintain an interest and desire to achieve in science, mathematics, engineering and

technology, and enlisting the help of parents in overcoming these difficulties;

and

(5) acquainting girls with careers in science, mathematics, engineering and

technology and encouraging girls to plan for careers in such fields.

(e) RESEARCH IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS.—Activities carried out in accordance with

subsection (c)(11) may include support for research projects performed by students

at secondary schools. Uses of funds made available through awards to partnerships

for purposes of this subsection may include—

(1) training secondary school mathematics and science teachers in the design

of research projects for students;

(2) establishing a system for students and teachers involved in research

projects funded under this section to exchange information about their projects

and research results; and

(3) assessing the educational value of the student research projects by such

means as tracking the academic performance and choice of academic majors of

students conducting research.

(f) STIPENDS.—Grants awarded under this section may be used to provide stipends

for teachers or students participating in training or research activities that would

not be part of their typical classroom activities.

SEC. 102. SELECTION PROCESS.

(a) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education or an eligible nonprofit organization (or a consortium thereof) seeking funding under section 101 shall submit

an application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such

information as the Director may require. The application shall include, at a

minimum—

(1) a description of the partnership and the role that each member will play

in implementing the proposal;

(2) a description of each of the activities to be carried out, including—

(A) how such activities will be aligned with State and local standards and

with other activities that promote student achievement in mathematics and

science; and

(B) how such activities will be based on a review of relevant research,

how such activities will encourage the interest of women and minorities in

science, mathematics, engineering and technology and will help prepare

women and minorities to pursue postsecondary studies in these fields, and

why such activities are expected to improve student performance and

strengthen the quality of mathematics and science instruction;

(3) a description of the number, size and nature of any stipends that will be

provided to students or teachers and the reasons such stipends are needed;

(4) how the partnership will serve as a catalyst for reform of mathematics and

science education programs; and

(5) how the partnership will assess its success.

(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under

subsection (a), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the ability of the partnership to effectively carry out the proposed programs;

(2) the extent to which the members of the partnership are committed to

making the partnership a central organizational focus;

(3) the degree to which activities carried out by the partnership are based on

relevant research and likely to result in increased student achievement;

(4) the degree to which such activities are aligned with State or local standards; and

(5) the likelihood that the partnership will demonstrate activities that can be

widely implemented as part of larger scale reform efforts.

(c) AWARDS.—(1) The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that partnership grants be awarded under section 101 in a wide range of geographic areas

and that the partnership program include rural, suburban, and urban local educational agencies.

(2) Not less than 50 percent of the partnerships funded under section 101 shall

include businesses.

5

(3) The Director shall award grants under this subtitle for a period not to exceed

5 years.

SEC. 103. ACCOUNTABILITY AND DISSEMINATION.

(a) ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—The Director shall evaluate the partnerships program established under section 101. At a minimum, such evaluations shall—

(1) use a common set of benchmarks and assessment tools to identify best

practices and materials developed and demonstrated by the partnerships; and

(2) to the extent practicable, compare the effectiveness of practices and materials developed and demonstrated by the partnerships authorized under this

subtitle with those of partnerships funded by other State or Federal agencies.

(b) DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS.—(1) The results of the evaluations required under

subsection (a) shall be made available to the public, including through the National

Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library, and

shall be provided to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives and

the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the Committee on

Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.

(2) Materials developed under the program established under section 101 that are

demonstrated to be effective shall be made available through the National Science,

Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library.

(c) ANNUAL MEETING.—The Director shall convene an annual meeting of the partnerships participating under this subtitle to foster greater national collaboration.

SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to

carry out this subtitle $200,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

Subtitle B—Teacher Research Scholarship

Program

SEC. 111. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants to

institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations (or consortia

thereof) to provide research opportunities in mathematics, science, and engineering

for elementary or secondary school teachers of mathematics or science. Such institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations may include one or more

businesses or Federal or State laboratories as partners under the program.

(2) Grants shall be awarded under this section on a merit-reviewed competitive

basis.

(b) PROGRAM COMPONENTS.—Grant recipients under this section—

(1) shall recruit and select teachers and provide such teachers with opportunities to conduct research in academic, business, or government laboratories;

(2) shall ensure that the teachers have mentors and other programming support to ensure that their research experience will contribute to their understanding of mathematics, science, and engineering and improve their performance in the classroom;

(3) shall provide teachers with a scholarship stipend; and

(4) may provide room and board for residential programs.

(c) USE OF FUNDS.—(1) Not more than 25 percent of the funds provided under a

grant under this section may be used for programming support for teachers.

(2) The Director shall issue guidelines specifying the minimum and maximum

amounts of stipends recipients may provide to teachers under this section.

(d) DURATION.—A teacher may participate in research under the program under

this section for up to 1 calendar year or 2 sequential summers.

SEC. 112. SELECTION PROCESS.

(a) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education or an eligible nonprofit organization (or a consortium thereof) seeking funding under section 111 shall submit

an application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such

information as the Director may require. The application shall include, at a

minimum—

(1) a description of the research opportunities that will be made available to

elementary or secondary school teachers, or both, by the applicant;

(2) a description of how the applicant will recruit teachers to participate in

the program and the criteria that will be used to select the participants;

(3) a description of the number, types, and amounts of the scholarships that

the applicant intends to offer to participating teachers; and

6

(4) a description of the programming support that will be provided to participating teachers.

(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under

subsection (a), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the proposed program;

(2) the extent to which the applicant is committed to making the program a

central organizational focus; and

(3) the likelihood that the research experiences and programming to be offered by the applicant will improve elementary and secondary education.

(c) AWARDS.—(1) The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that grants

be awarded under this subtitle in a wide range of geographic areas and to assist

teachers from rural, suburban, and urban local educational agencies.

(2) The Director shall award grants under this subtitle for a period not to exceed

5 years.

SEC. 113. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated for the National Science Foundation to

carry out this subtitle $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

TITLE II—NATIONAL SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS,

ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION DIGITAL LIBRARY

SEC. 201. IN GENERAL.

The Director shall establish a program to expand the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library (hereinafter in this

Act referred to as the ‘‘Digital Library’’) program to enable timely and continuous

dissemination of elementary and secondary science, math, engineering, and technology educational resources, materials, practices, and policies through the Internet

and other digital technologies. The expanded Digital Library shall—

(1) contain an Internet-based repository of curricular materials, practices, and

teaching modules;

(2) contain, to the extent practicable, an Internet-based repository of information about national and regional conferences related to the improvement of elementary and secondary mathematics, science, engineering and technology education, including, if appropriate, links to materials generated by those conferences.

(3) provide users of the Digital Library with access to all materials in the Digital Library through a single entry point;

(4) contain only materials that have been peer-reviewed and tested to ensure

factual accuracy and effectiveness and that are aligned with recognized State

and national mathematics and science standards;

(5) present materials in a format that is consistent, facilitates ease of comparison and use by classroom teachers, and contains appropriate links to other

Federal educational clearinghouses; and

(6) provide materials related to mathematics and science partnership programs, including—

(A) links to all of the programs developed through the mathematics and

science partnerships established under subtitle A of title I;

(B) data related to assessment and evaluation and final program reports

developed under subtitle A of title I, including both positive and negative

outcomes of the program;

(C) materials developed by the partnerships under subtitle A of title I

that have been demonstrated to be effective; and

(D) a mechanism for users to make comments or suggestions regarding

the use and effectiveness of posted materials.

SEC. 202. GRANTS AND CONTRACT.

(a) GRANTS.—The Director may award grants to institutions of higher education

or other qualified entities—

(1) to design all or parts of the Digital Library;

(2) to provide assistance to schools in the selection and adaptation of curricular materials, practices and teaching methods made available through the

Digital Library; or

(3) to carry out the activities described in both paragraphs (1) and (2).

Grants awarded under this subsection may cover the costs of acquiring and reviewing educational materials for dissemination through the Digital Library.

7

(b) OPERATION.—The Director may contract out the operation and management of

the Digital Library.

(c) COMPETITIVE AWARDS.—Grants and contracts shall be awarded under this section on a competitive basis.

SEC. 203. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated for the National Science Foundation to

carry out this title $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

TITLE III—STRATEGIC EDUCATION RESEARCH

PROGRAM

Subtitle A—Centers

SEC. 301. ESTABLISHMENT OF CENTERS FOR RESEARCH ON LEARNING AND EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director shall award grants to institutions of higher

education (or consortia thereof) to establish 4 multidisciplinary Centers for Research

on Learning and Education Improvement.

(2) Grants shall be awarded under this subsection on a merit-reviewed competitive basis.

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Centers shall be to conduct and evaluate research in cognitive science, education and related fields and to develop ways in

which the results of such research can be applied in elementary and secondary

classrooms to improve the teaching of mathematics and science.

(c) FOCUS.—(1) Each Center shall be focused on a different challenge faced by elementary or secondary school teachers of mathematics and science. In determining

the research focus of the Centers, the Director shall consult with the National Academy of Sciences and take into account the extent to which other Federal programs

support research on similar questions.

(2) The proposal solicitation issued by the Director shall state the focus of each

Center and applicants shall apply for designation as a specific Center.

SEC. 302. SELECTION PROCESS.

(a) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education (or a consortium thereof)

seeking funding under this title shall submit an application to the Director at such

time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Director may require.

The application shall include, at a minimum a description of—

(1) the initial research projects that will be undertaken by the Center and the

process by which new projects will be identified;

(2) how the Center will work with other research institutions and schools to

broaden the national research agenda on learning and teaching;

(3) how the Center will promote active collaboration among physical, biological, and social science researchers;

(4) how the Center will promote active participation by elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers and administrators; and

(5) how the Center will reduce the results of its research to educational practice and assess the success of new practices.

(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under

subsection (a), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the research program

and reduce its results to effective educational practice;

(2) the experience of the applicant in conducting research on the science of

teaching and learning and the capacity of the applicant to foster new multidisciplinary collaborations;

(3) the capacity of the applicant to attract precollege educators from a diverse

array of schools and professional experiences for participation in Center activities; and

(4) the capacity of the applicant to attract and provide adequate support for

graduate students to pursue research at the intersection of educational practice

and basic research on human cognition and learning.

(c) AWARDS.—The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that the Centers funded under this section conduct research and develop educational practices

designed to improve the educational performance of a broad range of students, including those from groups underrepresented in mathematics, science and engineering.

8

SEC. 303. ANNUAL CONFERENCE.

The Director shall convene an annual meeting of the Centers to foster collaboration among the Centers and to further disseminate the results of the Centers’ activities.

SEC. 304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated for the National Science Foundation to

carry out this title $12,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

Subtitle B—Fellowships

SEC. 311. EDUCATION RESEARCH TEACHER FELLOWSHIPS.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—(1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants

to institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit entities (or consortia thereof)

to provide research opportunities related to the science of learning to elementary

and secondary school teachers of science and mathematics.

(2) Grants shall be awarded under this section on a merit-reviewed competitive

basis.

(b) PROGRAM COMPONENTS.—Grant recipients under this section—

(1) shall recruit and select teachers and provide such teachers with opportunities to conduct research in the fields of—

(A) brain research as a foundation for research on human learning;

(B) behavioral, cognitive, affective, and social aspects of human learning;

(C) science and mathematics learning in formal and informal educational

settings; or

(D) learning in complex educational systems;

(2) shall ensure that participating teachers have mentors and other programming support to ensure that their research experience will contribute to their

understanding of the science of learning;

(3) shall provide programming, guidance, and support to ensure that participating teachers disseminate information about the current state of education research and its implications on classroom practice to other elementary and secondary educators and can use that information to improve their performance in

the classroom;

(4) shall provide participating teachers with a scholarship stipend; and

(5) may provide room and board for residential programs.

(c) USE OF FUNDS.—(1) Not more than 25 percent of the funds provided under a

grant under this section may be used for programming support for participating

teachers.

(2) The Director shall issue guidelines specifying the minimum or maximum

amounts of stipends grant recipients may provide to teachers under this section.

(d) DURATION.—A teacher may participate in research under the program under

this section for up to 1 calendar year or 2 sequential summers.

(e) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education or eligible nonprofit entity

(or a consortium thereof) seeking funding under this section shall submit an application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such information

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

(1) a description of the research opportunities that will be made available to

elementary or secondary school teachers, or both, by the applicant;

(2) a description of how the applicant will recruit teachers to participate in

the program, and the criteria that will be used to select the participants;

(3) a description of the number, types, and amounts of the scholarships that

the applicant intends to offer to participating teachers; and

(4) a description of the programming support that will be provided to participating teachers to enhance their research experience and to enable them to educate their peers about the value, findings, and implications of education research.

(f) REVIEW OF APPLICANTS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under subsection (e), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the proposed program;

(2) the extent to which the applicant is committed to making the program a

central organizational focus; and

(3) the likelihood that the research experiences and programming to be offered by the applicant will improve elementary and secondary education.

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

to the National Science Foundation for carrying out this section $5,000,000 for each

of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.

9

TITLE IV—ROBERT NOYCE SCHOLARSHIP

PROGRAM

SEC. 401. DEFINITIONS.

In this title—

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

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

(2) the term ‘‘mathematics, science, or engineering professional’’ means a person who holds a baccalaureate, masters, or doctoral degree in science, mathematics, or engineering and is working in that field or a related area;

(3) the term ‘‘scholarship’’ means an award under section 405; and

(4) the term ‘‘scholarship recipient’’ means a student receiving a scholarship;

(5) the term ‘‘stipend’’ means an award under section 406;

(6) the term ‘‘stipend recipient’’ means a science, mathematics or engineering

professional receiving a stipend; and

(7) the term ‘‘cost of attendance’’ has the meaning given such term in section

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

SEC. 402. SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants to

institutions of higher education (or consortia thereof) to provide scholarships and

programming designed to recruit and train mathematics and science teachers. Such

program shall be known as the ‘‘Robert Noyce Scholarship Program’’.

(2) Grants shall be provided under this section on a merit-reviewed competitive

basis.

(b) USE OF GRANTS.—Grants provided under this title shall be used by institutions

of higher education—

(1) to develop and implement a program to encourage top college juniors and

seniors majoring in mathematics, science, and engineering at the grantee’s institution to become mathematics and science teachers, through—

(A) administering scholarships in accordance with section 405;

(B) offering programs to help scholarship recipients to teach in elementary and secondary schools, including programs that will result in teacher

certification; and

(C) offering programs to scholarship recipients, both before and after they

receive their baccalaureate degree, to enable the recipients to become better

mathematics and science teachers, and to exchange ideas with others in

their fields; or

(2) to develop and implement a program to encourage science, mathematics,

or engineering professionals to become mathematics and science teachers,

through—

(A) administering stipends in accordance with section 406;

(B) offering programs to help stipend recipients obtain teacher certification; and

(C) offering programs to stipend recipients, both during and after matriculation, to enable recipients to become better mathematics and science

teachers and exchange ideas with others in their fields; or

(3) for both of the purposes described in paragraphs (1) and (2).

SEC. 403. SELECTION PROCESS.

(a) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education (or a consortium thereof)

seeking funding under this title shall submit an application to the Director at such

time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Director may require.

The application shall include, at a minimum—

(1) a description of the scholarship or stipend program, or both, that the applicant intends to operate, including the number of scholarships or the size and

number of stipends the applicant intends to award, and the selection process

that will be used in awarding the scholarships or stipends;

(2) evidence that the applicant has the capability to administer the scholarship or stipend program in accordance with the provisions of this title; and

(3) a description of the programming that will be offered to scholarship or stipend recipients during and after their matriculation.

(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under

subsection (a), the Director shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the program;

(2) the extent to which the applicant is committed to making the program a

central organizational focus;

10

(3) the ability of the proposed programming to enable scholarship or stipend

recipients to become successful mathematics and science teachers;

(4) the number and quality of the students that will be served by the program; and

(5) the ability of the applicant to recruit students who would otherwise not

pursue a career in teaching.

SEC. 404. AWARDS.

(a) DESIGNATION.—The Director shall designate institutions awarded grants under

this title as ‘‘National Teacher Scholarship Centers’’. (b) DISTRIBUTION.—The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that

grants be awarded under this title in a wide range of geographic areas and to prepare students for jobs in rural, suburban, and urban local educational agencies.

(c) DURATION.—Grants awarded under this title shall be for a period of 10 years.

SEC. 405. SCHOLARSHIP REQUIREMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Scholarships under this title shall be available only to students

who are—

(1) majoring in science, mathematics, or engineering; and

(2) in the last 2 years of a baccalaureate degree program.

(b) SELECTION.—Individuals shall be selected to receive scholarships primarily on

the basis of academic merit, with consideration given to financial need and to the

goal of promoting the participation of minorities, women, and people with disabilities.

(c) AMOUNT.—Scholarships under this title shall be in the amount of $7,500 per

year, or the cost of attendance, whichever is less. Individuals may receive a maximum of 2 years of scholarship support.

(d) SERVICE OBLIGATION.—If an individual receives a scholarship, that individual

shall be required to complete, within 6 years after graduation from the baccalaureate degree program for which the scholarship was awarded, 2 years of service

as a mathematics or science teacher for each year a scholarship was received. Service required under this subsection shall be performed at a school receiving assistance under chapter 1 of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of

1965 (Public Law 89–10).

SEC. 406. STIPENDS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Stipends under this title shall be available only to mathematics,

science, and engineering professionals who, while receiving the stipend, are enrolled

in a program to receive certification to teach.

(b) SELECTION.—Individuals shall be selected to receive stipends under this title

primarily on the basis of academic merit, with consideration given to financial need

and to the goal of promoting the participation of minorities, women, and people with

disabilities.

(c) AMOUNT.—Stipends under this title shall be for an amount of up to $7,500 per

year, but in no event more than the cost of attendance. Individuals may receive a

maximum of 1 year of stipend support.

(d) SERVICE OBLIGATION.—If an individual receives a stipend under this title, that

individual shall be required to complete, within 6 years after graduation from the

program for which the stipend was awarded, 2 years of service as a mathematics

or science teacher for each year a stipend was received. Service required under this

subsection shall be performed at a school receiving assistance under chapter 1 of

title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89–10).

SEC. 407. CONDITIONS OF SUPPORT.

As a condition of acceptance of a scholarship or stipend under this title, a recipient shall enter into an agreement with the institution of higher education—

(1) accepting the terms of the scholarship or stipend pursuant to sections 405

and 409 or section 406;

(2) agreeing to provide the awarding institution of higher education with annual certification of employment and current contact information and to participate in surveys provided by the institution of higher education as part of an

ongoing assessment program; and

(3) establishing that any scholarship recipient shall be liable to the United

States for any amount that is required to be repaid in accordance with the provisions of section 409.

SEC. 408. COLLECTION FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.

(a) MONITORING COMPLIANCE.—An institution of higher education (or consortium

thereof) receiving a grant under this title shall, as a condition of participating in

the program, enter into an agreement with the Director to monitor the compliance

of scholarship and stipend recipients with their respective service requirements.

11

(b) COLLECTION OF REPAYMENT.—(1) In the event that a scholarship recipient is

required to repay the scholarship under section 409, the institution shall be responsible for collecting the repayment amounts.

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), any repayment shall be returned to the

Treasury of the United States.

(3) A grantee may retain a percentage of any repayment it collects to defray administrative costs associated with the collection. The Director shall establish a single, fixed percentage that will apply to all grantees.

SEC. 409. FAILURE TO COMPLETE SERVICE OBLIGATION.

(a) GENERAL RULE.—If an individual who has receive a scholarship under this

title—

(1) fails to maintain an acceptable level of academic standing in the educational institution in which the individual is enrolled, as determined by the

National Science Foundation;

(2) is dismissed from such educational institution for disciplinary reasons;

(3) withdraws from the baccalaureate degree program for which the award

was made before the completion of such program;

(4) declares that the individual does not intend to fulfill his service obligation

under this title; or

(5) fails to fulfill the service obligation of the individual under this title,

such individual shall be liable to the United States as provided in subsection (b).

(b) AMOUNT OF REPAYMENT.—(1) If a circumstance described in subsection (a) occurs before the completion of one year of a service obligation under this title, the

United States shall be entitled to recover from the individual, within one year after

the date of the occurrence of such circumstance, an amount equal to—

(A) the total amount of awards received by such individual under this title;

plus

(B) the interest on such amounts which would be payable if at the time the

amounts were received they were loans bearing interest at the maximum legal

prevailing rate, as determined by the Treasurer of the United States,

multiplied by 2.

(2) If a circumstance described in subsection (a)(4) or (a)(5) occurs after the completion of one year of a service obligation under this title, the United States shall

be entitled to recover from the individual, within one year after the date of the occurrence of such circumstance, an amount equal to—

(A) the total amount of awards received by such individual under this title

minus $3,750 for each full year of service completed; plus

(B) the interest on such amounts which would be payable if at the time the

amounts were received they were loans bearing interest at the maximum legal

prevailing rate, as determined by the Treasurer of the United States.

(c) EXCEPTIONS.—(1) The National Science Foundation may provide for the partial

or total waiver or suspension of any service obligation or payment by an individual

under this title whenever compliance by the individual is impossible or would involve extreme hardship to the individual, or if enforcement of such obligation with

respect to the individual would be unconscionable.

(2) Any obligation of an individual under this title for payment under subsection

(b) may be released by a discharge in bankruptcy under title 11, United States

Code, only if such discharge is granted after the expiration of the 5-year period beginning on the first date that such payment is required.

SEC. 410. REPORT.

(a) DATA COLLECTION.—Institutions receiving grants under this title shall supply

to the Director any relevant statistical and demographic data on scholarship recipients and stipend recipients the Director may request, including information on employment required by section 407.

(b) ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 7 years after the date of the enactment of this

Act, the Director shall submit to Congress a report assessing the impact of the implementation of this title on drawing into teaching top mathematics and science students, including students from groups underrepresented in mathematics, science

and engineering.

SEC. 411. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science

Foundation to carry out this title $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2005.

(b) SPECIFIC APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the

National Science Foundation to support the activities described in subsections

(b)(1)(A) and (C) and (b)(2)(A) and (C) of section 402, such sums as may be necessary

for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011.

12

TITLE V—REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH

CENTERS

SEC. 501. REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH CENTERS.

The Director shall ensure that any National Science Foundation program that

awards grants for the establishment of research centers at institutions of higher

education after the date of the enactment of this Act—

(1) requires that every center offer programs for elementary and secondary

mathematics and science teachers and students to increase their understanding

of the field in which the center specializes; and

(2) uses the quality of a center’s proposed precollege education programs as

a criterion in determining grant awards.

TITLE VI—EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES

RESEARCH

SEC. 601. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH CENTERS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—(1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants to

institutions of higher education (or consortia thereof) to establish centers to evaluate

and improve the effectiveness of information technologies in elementary and secondary mathematics and science education.

(2) Grants shall be awarded under this title on a merit-reviewed competitive

basis.

(b) ACTIVITIES.—Centers established under this title shall, at a minimum—

(1) identify educational approaches and techniques that are based on the use

of information technology and that have the potential for being effective in

classroom settings;

(2) develop methods to measure the effectiveness of various applications of information technology in mathematics and science education, including methods

to measure student performance;

(3) evaluate the effectiveness of the use of technology in elementary and secondary mathematics and science education in a variety of classroom settings;

and

(4) identify the key variables that influence educational effectiveness and the

conditions necessary to implement successfully an approach or technique determined to be educationally effective for a particular educational setting;

(5) ensure that the results of such evaluations are widely disseminated; and

(6) develop a program to work with local educational agencies to help them

apply the results of the research conducted under this section.

SEC. 602. SELECTION PROCESS.

(a) APPLICATION.—An institution of higher education (or a consortium thereof)

seeking funding under this title shall submit an application to the Director at such

time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Director may require.

The application shall include, at a minimum, a description of—

(1) the approaches to the use of information technology that the center will

initially evaluate, how it chose those approaches, how it will seek out any additional approaches, and how assessment procedures would be developed and applied;

(2) how the center will work with local education agencies to evaluate the approaches in classrooms;

(3) how the center will disseminate the results of its work; and

(4) how the center will develop an outreach program to work with local educational agencies to help them apply the results of its research.

(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS.—In evaluating the applications submitted under

subsection (a), the Director shall consider, at a minimum, the ability of the applicant to effectively evaluate information technology approaches and to help local education agencies apply the results of those evaluations.

(c) AWARDS.—The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that the program established under this title evaluates information technology—

(1) in a wide range of grade levels and geographic areas;

(2) in rural, suburban, and urban schools; and

(3) with a wide variety of students in terms of race, ethnicity, and income.

13

SEC. 603. DOCUMENTATION AND DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The results of the research and evaluations conducted in accordance with section 601 shall be documented and widely disseminated, including

through publication in peer-reviewed scholarly journals.

(b) WORKSHOPS, CONFERENCE, AND WEB SITES.—The Director is authorized to

sponsor and support workshops, conferences, and dedicated web sites to disseminate

information about the activities of the educational technology research centers established under section 601.

(c) DEPOSIT IN LIBRARY.—Information about effective approaches and techniques,

including information and materials necessary for their implementation, shall be deposited in the Digital Library.

SEC. 604. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to

carry out the program established under section 601—

(1) $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004; and

(2) $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.

TITLE VII—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

SEC. 701. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PROFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS.

(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:

(1) Proficiency in mathematics, science, and information technology is necessary to prepare all students in the United States for participation in the 21st

Century and to guarantee that the United States economy remains vibrant and

competitive.

(2) In order to achieve such results, it is important that the Federal Government shows interest in economically disadvantaged students who have not been

provided with opportunities that will improve their knowledge of mathematics,

science, and technology.

(3) Many economically disadvantaged students in urban and rural America

share a common need to receive a quality education, but often the schools of

such students lack the needed resources to lift those students into the information age.

(4) The schools and businesses serving urban and rural communities are strategically positioned to form a unique partnership with students that will increase their mathematics, science, and technology proficiency and encourage

and support their undergraduate study in those fields for the benefit of the Nation.

(b) AUTHORITY.—(1)(A) The Director shall establish a demonstration project under

which the Director awards grants in accordance with this section to eligible local

educational agencies.

(B) A local educational agency that receives a grant under this section may use

such grant funds to develop a program that builds or expands mathematics, science,

and information technology curricula, to purchase equipment necessary to establish

such program, and to provide professional development to enhance teacher quality

in those fields.

(2) A program described in paragraph (1) shall—

(A) provide teacher professional development specifically in information technology, mathematics, and science; and

(B) provide students with a rich standards-based course of study in mathematics, science, and information technology.

(c) ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.—For purposes of this section, a local

educational agency is eligible to receive a grant under this section if the agency—

(1) provides assurances that it has executed conditional agreements with representatives of the private sector to provide services and funds described in subsection (d); and

(2) agrees to enter into an agreement with the Director to comply with the

requirements of this section.

(d) PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION.—The conditional agreements referred to in

subsection (c)(1) shall describe participation by the private sector, including—

(1) the donation of computer hardware, software, and other technology tools;

(2) the establishment of internship and mentoring opportunities for students

who participate in the mathematics, science, and information technology program; and

(3) the donation of higher education scholarship funds for eligible students to

continue their study of mathematics, science, and information technology.

14

(e) APPLICATION.—(1) To apply for a grant under this section, each eligible local

educational agency shall submit an application to the Director in accordance with

guidelines established by the Director pursuant to paragraph (2).

(2)(A) The guidelines referred to in paragraph (1) shall require, at a minimum,

that the application include—

(i) a description of proposed activities consistent with the uses of funds and

program requirements under paragraphs (1)(B) and (2) of subsection (b);

(ii) a description of the higher education scholarship program, including criteria for selection, duration of scholarship, number of scholarships to be awarded each year, and funding levels for scholarships; and

(iii) evidence of private sector participation and financial support to establish

an internship, mentoring, and scholarship program.

(B) The Director shall issue and publish such guidelines not later than 6 months

after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(3) The Director shall select a local educational agency to receive an award under

this section on the basis of merit to be determined after conducting a comprehensive

review.

(f) PRIORITY.—The Director shall give special priority in awarding grants under

this section to eligible local educational agencies that—

(1) demonstrate the greatest ability to obtain commitments from representatives of the private sector to provide services and funds described under subsection (d); and

(2) demonstrate the greatest economic need.

(g) ASSESSMENT.—The Director shall assess the effectiveness of activities carried

out under this section.

(h) STUDY AND REPORT.—The Director—

(1) shall initiate an evaluative study of the effectiveness of the activities carried out under this section in improving student performance in mathematics,

science, and information technology at the precollege level and in stimulating

student interest in pursuing undergraduate studies in those fields; and

(2) shall report the findings of the study to Congress not later than 4 years

after the award of the first scholarship.

Such report shall include the number of students graduating from an institution of

higher education with a major in mathematics, science, or information technology

and the number of students who find employment in such fields.

(i) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

(1) The term ‘‘conditional agreement’’ means an arrangement between representatives of the private sector and local educational agencies to provide certain services and funds, such as, but not limited to, the donation of computer

hardware and software, the establishment of internship and mentoring opportunities for students who participate in mathematics, science, and information

technology programs, and the donation of scholarship funds for use at institutions of higher education by eligible students who have participated in the

mathematics, science, and information technology programs.

(2) The term ‘‘eligible student’’ means a student enrolled in the 12th grade

who—

(A) has participated in a mathematics, science, and an information technology program established pursuant to this section;

(B) has demonstrated a commitment to pursue a career in information

technology, mathematics, science, or engineering; and

(C) has attained high academic standing and maintains a grade point average of not less than 2.7 on a 4.0 scale for the period from the beginning

of the 10th grade through the time of application for a scholarship.

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

to the National Science Foundation to carry out this section $5,000,000 for each of

fiscal years 2002 through 2004.

(k) MAXIMUM GRANT AWARD.—An award made to an eligible local educational

agency under this section may not exceed $300,000.

SEC. 702. ARTICULATION PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND SECONDARY

SCHOOLS.

(a) OUTREACH GRANTS.—In making awards for outreach grants authorized under

section 3(c)(2) of the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.

1862i(c)(2)), the Director shall give priority to proposals that involve secondary

schools with a majority of students from groups that are underrepresented in the

science, mathematics and engineering workforce. Awards in such cases shall not be

subject to the requirement under section 3(f)(3) of such Act for a matching contribution.

15

(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this section $5,000,000 for each of

fiscal years 2002 through 2004.

SEC. 703. ASSESSMENT OF IN-SERVICE TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS.

(a) ASSESSMENT.—The Director shall review all programs sponsored by the National Science Foundation that support in-service teacher professional development

for science teachers to determine— (1) the level of resources and degree of emphasis placed on training teachers

in the effective use of information technology in the classroom; and

(2) the allocation of resources between summer activities and follow-on reinforcement training and support to participating teachers during the school year.

(b) REPORT.—The Director shall submit to Congress, not later than 1 year after

the date of the enactment of this Act, a report that— (1) describes the results of the review and assessment conducted under subsection (a);

(2) summarizes the major categories of in-service teacher professional development activities supported at the time of the review, and the funding levels

for such activities; and

(3) describes any proposed changes, including new funding allocations, to

strengthen the in-service teacher professional development programs of the National Science Foundation that support activities described in paragraphs (a)(1)

and (2).

SEC. 704. INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS.

The Director may award competitive, merit-reviewed grants for the development

of educational materials on energy production and use, energy conservation, and renewable energy for use in elementary and secondary schools.

SEC. 705. STUDY OF BROADBAND NETWORK ACCESS FOR SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES.

(a) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Director shall conduct a study of the issues described in subsection (c), and not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment

of this Act, transmit to Congress a report including recommendations to address

those issues. Such report shall be updated annually for 6 additional years.

(b) CONSULTATION.—In preparing the reports under subsection (a), the Director

shall consult with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National

Institute of Standards and Technology, and such other Federal agencies and educational entities as the Director considers appropriate.

(c) ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED.—The reports shall— (1) identify the current status of high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access

to all public elementary and secondary schools and libraries in the United

States;

(2) identify how the provision of high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access

to the Internet to such schools and libraries can be effectively utilized within

each school and library;

(3) consider the effect that specific or regional circumstances may have on the

ability of such institutions to acquire high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access to achieve universal connectivity as an effective tool in the education process; and

(4) include options and recommendations to address the challenges and issues

identified in the reports.

SEC. 706. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE; LEARNING COMMUNITY CONSORTIUM.

Section 3 of the Scientific and Advanced Technology Act of 1992 (Public Law 102– 476; 42 U.S.C. 1862i) is amended by redesignating subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g)

as subsections (f), (g), (h), and (i), respectively, and by inserting after subsection (c)

the following new subsections: ‘‘(d) EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director is authorized to make awards on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis to associate-degree granting colleges, bachelor-degree

granting institutions, or education service agencies (or consortia thereof) to establish centers to assist elementary and secondary schools in the use of information technology for mathematics, science, or technology instruction. ‘‘(2) ACTIVITIES.—Activities of centers funded under this subsection may

include—

‘‘(A) helping schools evaluate their need for information technology;

‘‘(B) training teachers on how to best use information technology in instruction; and

‘‘(C) providing other information and training to help schools and teachers

ensure that they have access to appropriate information technologies and

are using them to maximum advantage.

16

‘‘(3) APPLICATION.—An application to receive funds under this subsection shall

include, at a minimum— ‘‘(A) a description of the services that will be provided to schools and

teachers; ‘‘(B) a list of the schools expected to be served;

‘‘(C) a description of how the applicant will draw on the expertise of its

faculty and students to assist schools and teachers; and ‘‘(D) a description of how the applicant will operate the program after

funding made available by this subsection has expired. ‘‘(4) SELECTION.—In evaluating applications submitted under paragraph (3),

the Director shall consider, at a minimum— ‘‘(A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the program;

‘‘(B) the number of schools and students who would be served and the

their need for assistance; ‘‘(C) the extent to which the applicant has worked with participating

schools to ensure that priority problems would be addressed by the assistance provided under this subsection; and ‘‘(D) the ability of the applicant to continue to provide assistance after

funding under this subsection has expired. ‘‘(5) AWARDS.—(A) The Director shall ensure, to the extent practicable, that

the program established by this subsection assists schools in rural, suburban,

and urban areas.

‘‘(B) No institution shall receive funds under this subsection for more than

three years.

‘‘(6) REPORT.—Not later than April 1, 2005, the Director shall provide a report

to Congress assessing the success of the program funded under this subsection

and the need of schools for continued assistance, and, based on the experience

with the program, recommending ways information technology assistance to

schools could be made more broadly available.

‘‘(7) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this subsection

$5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2004.

‘‘(e) LEARNING COMMUNITY CONSORTIUM.—The Director is authorized to provide to

a consortium composed of associate-degree granting colleges a grant in the amount

of $10,000,000 for the purpose of carrying out a pilot project to encourage women,

minorities and persons with disabilities to enter and complete programs in mathematics, science, engineering and technology.’’.

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of the bill is to make improvements in K–12 mathematics and science education, and for other purposes.

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

For years the United States has not provided many of its children with a world-class education. In 1983, Secretary of Education

Terrence Bell spurred a national dialogue about mathematics and

science education by releasing the provocative report ‘‘A Nation At

risk’’ which documented the steady decline in the educational

achievement of our children. The report stated its findings in dramatic terms:

If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on

America the mediocre educational performance that exists

today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As

it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. We

have even squandered the gains in achievement make in

the wake of the Sputnik challenge. Moreover, we have dismantled essential support systems which helped make

those gains possible. We have, in effect, been committing

an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament.

In September of 1989, President George H. Bush responded to

this report by convening an Education Summit at which the 49

17

participating Governors agreed to set national education goals. The

Charlottesville Summit was the first time that national and state

political leaders from both parties, with diverse views on education

reform, reached consensus on what the nation’s highest education

priorities should be. One year later President Bush formally proposed, and the Governors adopted, eight national goals. Among

these was the goal that by the year 2000, the United States would

be first in the world in mathematics and science.

Unfortunately, recent evidence demonstrates quite clearly that

the United States is not meeting the education goals it set for itself

more than ten years ago. In 1995, the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) evaluated the math and science

performance of students in fourth, eighth, and twelfth grades in 42

different countries. While U.S. fourth graders performed above the

international average in both science and mathematics, eighth

grade students performed at the international average in science

and below the international average in mathematics. U.S. students

in the twelfth grade, including our most advanced students, ranked

among the lowest of all countries participating in the study.

18

In 1999, a repeat of the TIMSS study (TIMSS–R) demonstrated

that despite the high scores made four years earlier by fourthgrade students, the mathematics and science achievement of U.S.

eight-grade students was still only at about the international average. This follow-up study confirmed that the decline in relative performance of students during the middle school years continues to

be a serious problem. Clearly, we can no longer assume that our

best and brightest students will be able to provide the extraordinary intellectual leadership that has allowed the United States

to overcome the obstacles created by an education system that fails

many of its students.

The inability of our Nation’s schools to provide children with a

world-class education in mathematics and science as illustrated by

the TIMSS–R has strategic and economic consequences. On February 15, 2001, the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st

Century, released its report ‘‘Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change.’’

This Federal Commission was chartered by the Secretary of Defense and the Congress to deliver a security strategy and implementation plan designed to meet the emerging challenges of the

21st century. Echoing ‘‘A Nation At Risk,’’ the report concluded

that:

The scale and nature of the ongoing revolution in science

and technology, and what this implies for the quality of

human capital in the 21st century, pose critical national

security challenges for the United States. Second only to a

weapon of mass destruction detonating in an American

city, we can think of nothing more dangerous than a failure to manage properly science, technology, and education

for the common good over the next quarter century.

Clearly, significant and immediate efforts must be made to better

prepare today’s math and science students who will be tomorrow’s

technology workers, researchers, educators, policy makers, leaders

and citizens. These efforts must involve all segments of our society.

19

President George W. Bush has called on the Nation to develop

partnerships involving parents, teachers, school administrators,

chief state school officers, leaders of the business community, and

institutions of higher education. Individually, none of these groups

has the capacity to address the problem that is before us. By forming partnerships, however, each group can make meaningful contributions and can accomplish together what none of them can accomplish alone.

The National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act responds to the President’s call. Using the resources of the National

Science Foundation, it encourages local communities to participate

in model partnerships designed to reform the instruction of elementary and secondary school mathematics and science education. The

Partnerships Act recognizes the unique contribution that institutions of higher education and businesses can make to education reform. It draws upon these strengths to develop model programs

that, if proven successful, will hold the key to large-scale education

reform efforts that can be conducted by state and local educational

agencies.

One of the first challenges that the partnerships must face will

be the development and implementation of better preparatory

training and professional programs for teachers. Under the partnership model, successful efforts will look beyond the colleges of

education to involve professional scientists, mathematicians and

engineers from institutions of higher education, government and industry. New models for professional development will be developed

and elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers

will be given opportunities to expand their own horizons through

research opportunities at universities, government or industry laboratories.

The need to recruit well-prepared teachers is an equally critical

challenge to mathematics and science education reform. A recent

study conducted by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Preparation showed that 50,000 new teachers enter the profession each year lacking appropriate preparation. Nearly 25% of all

secondary teachers do not have a college major or minor in their

main teaching field and, in particular, more than 30% of secondary

mathematics teachers hold neither a major nor a minor in mathematics. Teachers must possess a command of science and math content at a level sufficient to distill the important concepts and methodology and to present activities and opportunities to students that

will allow them to explore and understand basic concepts, logic,

and applications of mathematics and science. To encourage mathematics, science, and engineering students to pursue careers in

teaching, the Act establishes the Noyce Scholarship Program in

which students are offered scholarships in exchange for a commitment to teach. In addition, the Noyce Scholarship Program will facilitate transitions to careers in teaching for the most capable

science, engineering, mathematics and technology professionals.

These scholarships are named for Robert N. Noyce, an inventor of

the integrated circuit and co-founder of Intel.

Teacher recruitment, preparation and professional development

and other education reform efforts must be guided by a more robust body of research about student learning. Recent reports of the

National Academy of Sciences have shown that a wide and troubleVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.002 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
20

some gap exists between our current understanding of how the

brain functions during learning and actual classroom practices. The

gap between research and practice is even wider in the use of educational technologies in instruction or assessment. Aggressive technological expansion programs have resulted in the acquisition of

computer technology by over 99% of schools, yet many schools have

not optimized the use of these computers for instruction, assessment, or teacher enhancement. In part, this disparity in the use of

technology is the result of a shortage of professional development

opportunities for teachers, but also reflects a fundamental lack of

understanding of how best to use technology in teaching. The Partnerships Act recognizes that better research must provide the foundation for state and local education reform efforts. Titles III and VI

of the Partnerships Act authorize research programs designed to

provide educators and policy makers with scientifically based methods and materials upon which to build education reform activities.

In short, this Act calls on individuals, institutions of higher education, state and local educational agencies and corporations to collaboratively develop and implement programs to recruit the Nation’s brightest into careers in teaching, support these teachers

through meaningful training, engage them in high quality lifelong

learning opportunities, and arm them with scientifically-based, empirically validated teaching tools and practices to enable them to be

successful in their work.

IV. SUMMARY OF HEARINGS

On Wednesday, March 7, 2001, the House Committee on Science

held a hearing to gather teachers’ perspectives on how the federal

government can help improve K–12th grade science and math education. Testifying before the committee were four teachers representing elementary, middle, and secondary math and science

educators, three of whom were recipients of the prestigious Presidential Award for Excellence in Science and Mathematics Teaching. These witnesses spoke to the importance of improving the

quality and availability of professional development, developing

better student assessment tools, increasing the prestige of mathematics and science teachers, reducing the professional isolation experienced in the classroom, and building stronger partnerships between schools and universities.

On Wednesday, May 2, 2001, the House Science Committee’s

Subcommittee on Research held a hearing on ways the National

Science Foundation could most effectively stimulate K–12 math

and science education reform. The witnesses addressed the central

role that higher education, business, and school district partnerships can play in stimulating science and mathematics education

reform. The witnesses emphasized the importance of high quality

professional development programs, the important role that the

prestige of business partners can play in encouraging broader acceptance of reform activities, the need to recruit better prepared

teachers, the important mentoring role that can be played by master teachers, and the importance of long-term rather than shortterm programs.

On May 10, 2001, the House Science Committee’s Subcommittee

on Research held a hearing to examine the gap that currently exists between what is known about how people learn and the methVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.002 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
21

ods and materials educators use to teach. The witnesses gave testimony to the critical importance of establishing a long-term research agenda designed to bridge the gap between cognitive science

and education research and to finding better ways to ensure that

the results of this research are incorporated into teacher education,

professional development, and classroom activities.

V. COMMITTEE ACTION

On May 16, 2001, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert introduced H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science

Partnerships Act, a bill to authorize appropriations for science,

mathematics, engineering and technology education for Fiscal

Years 2003 through 2011.

The Subcommittee on Research met on June 7, 2001, to consider

the bill. An en bloc amendment was offered by Subcommittee

Chairman Nick Smith and the ranking member of the Subcommittee, Eddie Bernice Johnson. In addition to making technical

corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) removed the requirement

for matching funds for each authorized program and instead permitted the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to establish matching requirements for any of the programs authorized

by the bill with the exception of the Noyce Scholarship program;

(2) specified that allowable activities under the Mathematics and

Science Education Partnerships include programs that encourage

the interest of girls in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology; (3) required applications for Partnership grants that will

provide education programs for students to describe how the proposed activities will encourage the interest of women and minorities in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology and prepared them to pursue further education in those fields; (4) enabled

funds from Digital Libraries grants to be used to provide assistance

to schools using materials made available through the Digital Library; (5) required the NSF Director to consider the capacity of

grant applicants for the Strategic Education Research Centers to

attract and support graduate students studying education research

and related fields; (6) established a fellowship program for K–12

teachers to pursue education research at institutions of higher education; (7) changed the amount that Noyce scholarship recipients

must pay back if they fail to complete their full service obligation;

(8) removed the requirement that NSF hold a conference on improving K–12 science, mathematics, engineering, and technology

education; (9) established a program at NSF to award grants to

local educational agencies working in partnership with industry to

develop and improve K–12 math, science, and information technology education programs; (10) required the NSF Director to give

priority to grant proposals under the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 to proposals that involve secondary schools with

a majority of students from groups underrepresented in the science,

mathematics, and engineering workforce; (11) required the NSF Director to review NSF’s in-service teacher professional development

programs; and (12) established a program to award grants for the

creation of centers to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of K–

12 information technologies. The amendment was adopted by voice

vote. With a quorum present, Ms. Johnson moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the bill, H.R. 1858, as amended, to the

22

Full Committee on Science with the recommendation that it be in

order for the amendment, in the nature of a substitute adopted by

the Subcommittee, to be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five minute rule at Full Committee,

and that the staff be instructed to make technical and conforming

changes to the bill as amended. The motion was agreed to by a

voice vote.

On June 13, 2001, the Full Committee met to consider the bill,

H.R. 1858, as reported by the Subcommittee on Research. An en

bloc amendment was offered by Committee Chairman Sherwood

Boehlert and ranking member Ralph Hall. In addition to making

technical corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) specified that

allowable activities under the Mathematics and Science Education

Partnerships includes programs that support research projects performed by high school students; (2) allowed funds for Mathematics

and Science Education Partnerships to be used to provide stipends

for teachers or students participating in certain training or research activities; (3) required the Digital Library to compile information on national and regional K–12 education conferences; (4) required the Strategic Education Research Centers to conduct research and development activities designed to improve the performance of a broad range of students; (5) required Noyce Scholarship

program recipients to supply relevant statistical and demographic

data on scholarship and stipend recipients; (6) required the NSF

Director to submit a report to Congress on the impact of the program; (7) allowed the NSF Director to award grants for the development of K–12 educational materials on energy issues; (8) required the NSF Director to conduct a study on the impact of and

access to high bandwidth capacity to the Internet for schools and

libraries; (9) allowed the NSF Director to award grants to higher

education institutions to establish centers to assist K–12 schools in

the use of information technology for math, science and technology

instruction; and (10) allowed the NSF Director to award a grant to

a consortium of community colleges to encourage women, minorities, and persons with disabilities to study mathematics, science,

engineering, and technology. The amendment was adopted by voice

vote. With a quorum present, Mr. Gordon moved that the Committee favorably report the bill, H.R. 1858, as amended, to the

House with the recommendation that the bill as amended do pass,

and that the staff be instructed to make technical and conforming

changes to the bill as amended and prepare the legislative report,

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

before the House for consideration. The motion was agreed to by

a voice vote.

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

• Authorizes NSF to establish a program of mathematics and

science education partnerships involving universities and local educational agencies. These partnerships will focus on a wide array of

reform efforts ranging from professional development to curriculum

reform. The partnerships may include the state educational agency

and 50% of the awards must go to partnerships that include businesses. The program is authorized at $200 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006.

23

• Authorizes a partnership program through which universities

will provide scholarships to math and science teachers allowing

them to participate in research projects at university, business,

state or federal laboratories. The program is authorized at $15 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006. • Authorizes the expansion of the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library to

include peer reviewed elementary and secondary mathematics,

science, engineering, and technology education materials. The program is authorized at $20 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002

through 2006. • Authorizes the establishment of four national university-based

centers for research on learning and education improvement. The

multidisciplinary research centers will conduct and evaluate research in cognitive science and related fields, and will translate the

results of that research to educational practice. The program is authorized at $12 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through

2006. • Authorizes a program to provide fellowships to enable K–12

teachers to participate in cognitive science, behavioral, and learning research at universities so that they will better understand the

connections between the science of learning and the practice of

teaching. The program is authorized at $5 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004. • Authorizes a new scholarship program designed to encourage

mathematics, science, and engineering majors to pursue careers in

teaching. The program provides grants to universities who will, in

turn, award scholarships to mathematics, science and engineering

majors who intend to teach. The institutions must also provide education and support programs for the scholarship recipients prior to

graduation and during their early years of teaching. Scholarship

recipients are required to teach in a K–12 school as payback for the

award. Stipends may also be offered to math, science, or engineering professionals who need course work to transition to a career in

teaching. The program is authorized at $20 million per year for

Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006.

• Requires that any new National Science Foundation-supported

research centers at institutions of higher education must work to

improve elementary and secondary mathematics and science education.

• Authorizes a program to award grants to universities to establish centers to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of information technologies in elementary and secondary mathematics and

science education. The program is authorized at $25 million per

year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004 and at $30 million per

year for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006.

• Authorizes grants to encourage partnerships between school

districts and businesses for enhanced mathematics and science

education, including information technology education. Participating businesses must agree to provide mentoring and scholarship

opportunities for students. This program is authorized at $5 million

per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004.

• Provides additional support for articulation partnerships between community colleges and secondary schools ($5 million per

year from 2002–2004), requires the NSF to conduct an assessment

24

of in-service teacher professional development programs and to

study broadband access for schools and libraries, and authorizes a

community college pilot project to encourage women, minorities and

persons with disabilities to enter and complete programs in mathematics, science, engineering and technology ($10 million). • Authorizes educational technology assistance centers to assist

K–12 schools in the use of information technology for math, science and technology instruction. The program is authorized at $5 million per year for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004.

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS (BY TITLE AND SECTION)

Section 1. Short title

Cites the Act as the ‘‘National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act.’’

Section 2. Findings

The Committee finds that: (1) 12 years ago the President called

upon the Nation’s Governors to establish common goals for the improvement of K–12 education; (2) one of the goals was that by the

year 2000, U.S. students would be first in the world in math and

science achievement; (3) despite the goals, U.S. 8th graders have

only demonstrated average performance in math and science

achievement; and (4) the U.S. must redouble its efforts in math,

science, engineering, and technology education.

Section 3. Definitions

Defines: (1) ‘‘Director’’ as the Director of the National Science

Foundation; (2) ‘‘institution of higher education’’ as defined in the

Higher Education Act of 1965; (3) ‘‘eligible nonprofit organization’’

as nonprofit research institute or nonprofit professional association

with a demonstrated experience delivering science and math education as determined by the Director; (4) ‘‘local educational agency,’’

‘‘state educational agency,’’ ‘‘elementary school,’’ and ‘‘secondary

school’’ as defined in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

of 1965.

Section 4. Authorizations of appropriations

States that any authorization of appropriations in the bill is in

addition to amounts otherwise authorized or appropriated for the

National Science Foundation (NSF).

Section 5. Matching requirements

Allows the Director of NSF to establish matching fund requirements for any of the programs authorized by the bill, with the exception of the Noyce Scholarship program authorized in Title IV.

Title I. Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships

SUBTITLE A. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS

Section 101. Program authorized

Establishes a competitive, merit-based program to award grants

to institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations to establish math and science partnership programs. Requires

institutions of higher education to partner with one or more local

25

educational agencies to be eligible to receive a partnership grant.

Includes the option for participation of a State educational agency

and/or one or more businesses. Requires that the higher education

institution include a mathematics, science or engineering department in the programs carried out through the partnership. Possible

activities for partnership programs include teacher recruitment,

training, and professional development—including training in educational techniques—distance learning programs, development of

curricular materials and assessment tools, and others, including

any other activities the NSF Director determines will accomplish

the goals of the program. Activities directed toward students

should encourage the ongoing interest of girls in science, mathematics, engineering and technology and prepare girls for continued

study and careers in these areas. Activities may also include research projects performed by students at secondary schools.

Section 102. Selection process

Establishes minimum requirements for grant applications and

describes criteria the Director must consider in reviewing them.

Requires institutions of higher education to enumerate the Partnership activities to be supported by grant funds and also to describe the role of each partner in the activities of the project. Directs the applicant to describe the activities of the project and their

alignment with State and local education standards, the project’s

basis in relevant education research, how it will serve as a catalyst

for reform, and how the project’s impact on improved student

learning will be assessed. Requires that not fewer than fifty percent of the awards include business. Requires that the Director

strive for geographic diversity in making the awards and that they

be for no longer than five years.

Section 103. Accountability and dissemination

Requires the Director to evaluate the impact of partnerships

using a common set of benchmarks and assessment tools to identify

best practices and materials developed by Partnership awardees.

Requires results of this evaluation effort to be made public through

the Digital Library and other media. Establishes that an annual

meeting for partnerships awardees be held by the Director to enhance national collaboration.

Section 104. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $200 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2006.

SUBTITLE B. TEACHER RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

Section 111. Program authorized

Establishes a competitive, merit-based grant program to enable

institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit organizations

to provide research opportunities in mathematics, science, and engineering for math and science teachers. Businesses or government

laboratories may be included as partners in the program. Grant recipients recruit and select teachers, provide opportunities to conduct research, and provide them with mentors and programming

support. Grant recipients must provide a stipend to participating

26

teachers and may provide room and board. Teachers may engage

in research opportunities during the school year or during up to

two sequential summers.

Section 112. Selection process

Establishes minimum requirements for grant applications and

describes criteria the Director must consider in reviewing them.

Requires institutions of higher education to describe the proposed

research, mentoring, and support programs that will be made

available to teacher research fellows and the number, types and

amounts of scholarships that will be offered to participating teachers. Limits awards to five years in duration.

Section 113. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $15 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2006.

Title II. National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and

Technology Education Digital Library

Section 201. In general

Directs the NSF director to expand the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital Library to

provide timely and continuous dissemination of K–12 science,

mathematics, engineering, and technology educational resources,

materials, practices, and policies through the Internet and other

digital technologies. Requires dissemination of effective materials

developed by the math and science partnerships established under

subtitle A of title I including relevant evaluations and assessments

and user comments pertaining to those materials.

Section 202. Grants and contracts

Allows NSF to provide grants to institutions of higher education

and other qualified entities to design all or parts of the digital library and/or provide assistance to schools for the selection and adaptation of curricular materials, practices, and teaching methods

that are made available through the Digital Library. Allows the Director to contract out operation of the Digital Library.

Section 203. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $20 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2006.

Title III. Strategic Education Research Program

SUBTITLE A. CENTERS

Section 301. Establishment of centers for research on learning and

education improvement

Directs the NSF Director to establish four multidisciplinary Centers for Research on Learning and Education Improvement by

awarding grants, using a merit-based, competitive process, to institutions of higher education. Centers are to conduct and evaluate research in cognitive science, education and related fields and to develop ways in which the results of such research can be applied to

the teaching of K–12 math and science. Each Center is to have a

27

distinct research focus, determined by the Director in consultation

with the National Academy of Sciences.

Section 302. Selection process

Establishes minimum requirements for grant applications and

describes criteria the Director must consider in reviewing them.

Requires institutions of higher education to describe how the Center will promote active collaboration between scientific disciplines

and with other research institutions, the plan by which existing research will be evaluated, and the way new areas of research will

be initiated to fill research gaps. Also requires that proposals describe a plan to promote active partnerships with elementary and

secondary schools and to reduce research results to educational

practice.

Section 303. Annual conference

Requires NSF to convene an annual conference of the Centers to

foster collaboration and dissemination of results.

Section 304. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $12 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2006.

SUBTITLE B—FELLOWSHIPS

Section 311. Education research teacher fellowships

Establishes a fellowship program for K–12 science and mathematics teachers to pursue education research fellowships at institutions of higher education. Grants are to be awarded on a competitive, peer-reviewed basis to institutions of higher education to set

up programs that will enable K–12 teachers to conduct research— on cognitive science; brain research as the basis of human learning;

or science and mathematics learning in formal, informal or complex

educational settings—under the guidance of a researcher at the institution. Grant recipients must recruit and select teachers, give

them opportunities to conduct research, and provide them with

mentors and programming support for up to one calendar year or

across two sequential summers for each teacher. Grant recipients

must provide a stipend to participating teachers and may provide

room and board. Authorizes $5 million for each of fiscal years 2002

through 2004.

Title IV. Robert Noyce Scholarship Program

Section 401. Definitions

Defines: (1) ‘‘mathematics and science teacher’’ as a mathematics,

science, or technology teacher at the elementary or secondary

school level; (2) ‘‘mathematics, science, or engineering professional’’ as a person who holds at least a baccalaureate degree in science,

mathematics or engineering and is working in that field or a related area; (3) ‘‘scholarship’’ as an award under section 405; (4) ‘‘scholarship recipient’’ as a student receiving a scholarship; (5) ‘‘stipend’’ as an award under section 406; (6) ‘‘stipend recipient’’ as a

science, mathematics or engineering professional receiving a stipend; and (7) ‘‘cost of attendance’’ as defined in section 472 of the

Higher Education Act of 1965.

28

Section 402. Scholarship program

Establishes a competitive, merit-based grant program to enable

institutions of higher education to obtain grants to award scholarships for the purpose of recruiting and training K–12 science and

math teachers. Requires grant recipients to establish programs to

encourage top college science, math, and engineering juniors and

seniors, and/or science, math, and engineering professionals, to become K–12 science and math teachers by administering scholarships and stipends, offering programs to facilitate the acquisition

of teaching skills and teacher certification credentials, and developing post-graduate support programs for teachers following graduation and placement in the field.

Section 403. Selection process

Establishes minimum requirements for grant applications and

describes criteria the Director must consider in reviewing them. Directs institutions of higher education to describe the scholarship or

stipend program including the number of scholarships or number

and size of stipends to be awarded, the selection process by which

individuals will be selected to receive such awards, and the programming that will be offered to scholarship or stipend recipients

during and after matriculation.

Section 404. Awards

Designates institutions awarded grants under this title as ‘‘National Teacher Scholarships Centers’’ and requires the Director, to

the extent practicable, to insure geographic diversity within the

funding portfolio. Establishes a 10-year duration for awards made

under this title.

Section 405. Scholarship requirements

Requires scholarship recipients to be students who are majoring

in science, mathematics or engineering and who are in the last two

years of a baccalaureate degree program, and requires selection of

recipients to be based primarily on academic merit with consideration given to financial need and the goals of promoting participation of minorities, women, and people with disabilities. Sets the

scholarship amount at $7,500 per year, or the cost of attendance,

which is less, for a maximum of two years of support. Requires

scholarship recipients to complete two years of service as a mathematics or science teacher for each year a scholarship was received.

Section 406. Stipends

Requires stipend recipients to be mathematics, science, and engineering professionals who are enrolled in a teacher certification

program while receiving the stipend. Requires that scholarships be

awarded on the basis of academic merit with consideration given

to financial need and the goal of promoting the participation of

women, minorities, and people with disabilities. Allows stipends of

up to $7,500, or the cost of attendance, whichever is less, for a

maximum of one year. Requires stipend recipients to complete two

years of service as a mathematics or science teacher in return for

the year of stipend support.

29

Section 407. Conditions of support

Requires a scholarship or stipend recipient to accept the service

obligation and repayment terms set forth by sections 405 and 409,

or section 406; to agree to provide the awarding institution of higher education with annual certification of employment and current

contact information; and to agree to participate in surveys as part

of the project assessment program.

Section 408. Collection for noncompliance

Requires grant recipient institutions to monitor the compliance of

scholarship and stipend recipients for their respective service requirements and to collect repayment in the event that the service

obligation is not met. Allows the grantee to retain a percentage of

any repayment it collects to defray the administrative cost of collection.

Section 409. Failure to complete service obligation

Details the repayment requirement for scholarship recipients

who fall below acceptable academic achievement standards, are dismissed from educational institutions for disciplinary reasons, withdraw from the degree program, declare an unwillingness to fulfill

the service obligation, or fail to complete the service obligation. Requires scholarship recipients who do not complete even a single

year of their service obligation to pay back the amount of the

award (plus interest) multiplied by two. Requires scholarship recipients who complete at least one year of their service obligation

but do not complete the rest to repay the total amount of their

award, less $3,750 for each year of service completed, plus interest.

Allows suspension of the repayment obligation in cases of undue

hardship.

Section 410. Report

Requires institutions receiving awards through this title to provide the Director with relevant statistical and demographic data on

scholarship and stipend recipients including information on employment required by section 407. Requires the Director to report

to Congress, no later than seven years after the date of enactment

of this Act, on the extent to which the program succeeded in drawing top mathematics and science students, including those from

underrepresented groups, into math and science teaching careers.

Section 411. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through

2005 and the necessary sums to fund the program support, reporting, compliance and collections requirements of awardees for each

of fiscal years 2006 through 2011.

Title V. Requirements for Research Centers

Section 501. Requirements for research centers

Requires the Director of NSF to ensure that grants to establish

new research centers at institutions of higher education incorporate

an elementary and secondary mathematics, science, engineering or

technology education component into their research and outreach

program.

30

Title VI. Educational Technologies Research

Section 601. Educational technology research centers

Establishes an NSF program to award grants, through a competitive, merit-based process, to institutions of higher education to

establish centers to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of information technologies in K–12 math and science education. Centers

will identify and study the effectiveness of educational approaches

and techniques that utilize information technology, identify the key

variables affecting educational effectiveness, and ensure that the

results of this analysis are widely disseminated to K–12 schools.

Section 602. Selection process

Establishes minimum requirements for grant applications and

describes criteria the Director must consider when reviewing them.

Directs the Director to award grants to institutions of higher education based on the ability of the applicant to effectively evaluate

educational uses of information technology and to help local educational agencies apply the results of those evaluations.

Section 603. Documentation and dissemination of results

Requires dissemination of results of projects supported by this

title through print media and the digital library and allows the Director to sponsor conferences, workshops, and websites in order to

disseminate information further.

Section 604. Authorization of appropriations

Authorizes $25 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004

and $30 million for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.

Title VII. Miscellaneous provisions

Section 701. Mathematics and science proficiency partnerships

Establishes an NSF program to award grants of up to $300,000

(through a competitive merit-based process) to local educational

agencies to develop mathematics, science, and information technology curricula, purchase equipment necessary to establish such

programs, and provide professional development opportunities for

teachers in support of improved math, science and technology education. In order to qualify for such a grant, the local educational

agency must execute an agreement with a private sector entity to

provide services and funds that include donations of computers, establishment of internship and mentoring programs, and the provision of college scholarships for students committed to pursuing a

career in math, science or information technology. Special priority

is to be given to grant applicants that demonstrate the greatest

economic need and the greatest ability to attract funds and services

from the private sector. Authorizes $5 million for each of fiscal

years 2002 through 2004.

Section 702. Articulation partnerships between community colleges

and secondary schools

For grant awards authorized under section 3(c)(2) of the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992, requires the Director

to give priority to grant proposals that involve secondary schools

31

with a majority of students from groups that are underrepresented

in the science, mathematics, and engineering workforce. Authorizes

$5 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004.

Section 703. Assessment of in-service teacher professional development programs

Requires the Director to review all NSF programs that support

teacher training programs to determine (1) what level of resources

and degree of emphasis is placed on the training of teachers in the

effective use of information technologies and (2) the allocation of resources between summer activities and follow-on training and support to participating teachers during the school year. Requires that

a report be made to Congress on the results of the review.

Section 704. Instructional materials

Allows the NSF Director to award competitive, merit-reviewed

grants for the development of educational materials on energy

issues for use in elementary and secondary schools.

Section 705. Study of broadband network access for schools and libraries

Requires the NSF Director to conduct a study, in consultation

with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other appropriate entities, on issues related to the current status of highspeed, large bandwidth capacity access to public elementary and

secondary schools and libraries.

Section 706. Educational technology assistance; learning community

consortium

Authorizes the NSF Director to make awards on a competitive,

merit-reviewed basis to associate-degree granting colleges, bachelor-degree granting institutions, or education service agencies (or

consortia thereof) to establish centers to assist K–12 schools in the

use of information technology for mathematics, science, or technology education. Authorizes $5 million for each of fiscal years

2002 through 2004. Also authorizes the NSF Director to provide a

grant to a consortium of community colleges for the purpose of carrying out a pilot project to encourage women, minorities and persons with disabilities to enter and complete programs in mathematics, science, engineering and technology. Authorizes $10 million

for this program.

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS

The Committee believes that efforts to improve K–12 math and

science education have not drawn sufficiently on the expertise and

resources of either universities and colleges, or business and industry. The Partnerships program is designed to change that.

If the partnerships are to succeed, they must be truly collaborative. Institutions of higher education and local educational agencies must work together (with any other participating partners) to

determine what assistance schools most need, and what assistance

universities and colleges are best equipped to provide. In evaluVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.008 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
32

ating proposals, NSF must ensure that the partnerships are truly

meeting the needs of our nation’s schools. Proposals in which a university dictates the terms of the program, or in which a school district seeks a superficial link with a university should be rejected.

NSF is well positioned to run this program. For years, it has

been a leader in involving higher education and businesses in innovative education and research projects.

The Committee believes that the Partnership program in this Act

is complementary to, and not duplicative of a similarly titled math

and science partnership program in H.R. 1, ‘‘The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.’’ While NSF has demonstrated strength in funding innovative demonstration programs to develop and test new

models of educational reform, the Department of Education has an

infrastructure well suited to the broad implementation and dissemination of new teaching materials, curricula and training programs. The Committee anticipates that the two programs will draw

on each other’s strengths and that the most promising NSF-funded

projects will be used as models and brought to full scale by the Department of Education’s partnership program. The Committee expects that the Director of NSF and the Secretary of Education and

their staffs will consult regularly to ensure the effective and efficient implementation of both programs.

NSF’s strength in education reform is largely due to its policy of

awarding grants on the basis of a competitive merit review. The

Partnership program explicitly requires that that standard of review be continued.

The Partnership program also explicitly requires that math,

science and engineering departments in institutions of higher education be active participants in the partnerships. One of the

strengths that universities and colleges bring to the partnerships

is the deep expertise of their faculty in the subjects that are taught

in elementary and secondary schools. The faculty members also

have first-hand knowledge of what kinds of preparation are needed

for students to succeed in post-secondary math, science and engineering programs.

While this Act requires that mathematics, science and engineering departments participate in the partnerships, the Committee

wants to encourage departments and colleges of education to play

an active role as well. The partnerships should be structured to address both subject content and pedagogy, and departments and colleges of education can contribute to assuring that both aspects of

teaching are addressed.

The Act also allows ‘‘eligible non-profit organizations’’ to participate in the partnerships, and leaves the determination of eligibility

to the Director. The Committee is aware of important contributions

to math and science education improvement being made by organizations like the Carnegie Institute and the American Chemical Society. The Committee is also aware of the important role that community-based organizations and other non-profit public interest

groups can make to improving education and involving a wide variety of students. NSF should allow, and encourage the partnerships

to include non-profit research institutes, professional associations,

community-based organizations and other entities that have demonstrated experience, providing math and science education.

33

The Act also allows consortia of institutions of higher education

to submit partnership proposals. The Committee encourages institutions to form consortia to build on their respective strengths.

State systems of higher education can apply to the program as consortia.

The Committee expects the partnership program to involve Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). HBCUs have a

proven record of training African American teachers and often have

strong relationships with schools in surrounding communities, especially with schools located in some of the nation’s most economically disadvantaged and isolated areas. HBCUs, either individually

or as part of consortia, can help meet the requirement that the

partnership program strive to address the needs of all types of

school districts in all parts of the country.

A key element of ongoing education reform efforts has been the

establishment by each of the states of challenging math and science

standards and accountability measures. The Committee expects the

partnerships funded under this Act to coordinate with state education agencies in the development and implementation of proposals to ensure that the programs and materials are aligned with

state and local standards.

The Act includes an extensive list of potential activities that may

be undertaken by the partnerships. The Committee emphasizes,

however, that this list is not exhaustive and that no partnership

is required to undertake any particular activity listed in the Act.

The partnership program should support a broad, innovative (and

effective) collection of activities, and NSF, through its merit review

procedures, has wide latitude to determine which proposed activities would fulfill the purposes of this Act.

The Committee does believe, however, that providing professional

development opportunities that enable teachers to use educational

technologies effectively should be an important focus of the partnership program. In providing such opportunities, the Act authorizes partnerships to make the technical expertise of graduate and

undergraduate students available to elementary and secondary

school teachers. Computer literate post-secondary students could

provide valuable assistance to teachers in using technology and

maintaining an operational technology infrastructure. The Committee also believes that professional development opportunities offered through the partnerships should incorporate the results of research funded under Titles III and VI of this Act (as reported).

The Act allows partnership grants to be used for stipends for

teachers or students participating in activities that would not be

part of their typical classroom activities. Activities eligible for stipends could include summer or after-school research opportunities

for teachers or secondary school students, and summer training

programs for teachers. Graduate or undergraduate students providing assistance to schools through activities permitted by section

101(c)(3) might also receive stipends.

In evaluating applications, NSF is to consider the extent to

which the members of the partnerships are committed to making

the partnership a central organizational focus. Partnerships are

unlikely to succeed unless the top administrators of the participating institutions are committed to the program. In addition, partnerships should involve as many aspects of the participating uniVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.009 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
34

versities, school districts and businesses as possible, and the partnership activities should be widely known within each of those institutions. A partnership that involves only an isolated faculty

member or teacher or two is unlikely to have much impact.

Also, in evaluating whether an institution of higher education is

likely to be able to carry out the proposed activities, NSF should

be aware of whether the institution has been identified as a lowperforming school under section 208 of the Higher Education Act

of 1965.

The Act requires the Director to strive to involve a range of geographic areas in the partnership program. The partnership program is designed to highlight and support a variety of partnership

models that could be widely copied. If such proliferation is to occur,

the models must be designed for, and tested in a variety of locations, and in rural, suburban and urban areas. That does not

mean, however, that partnerships must be awarded in every state.

The Committee also wants to ensure that partnerships increase

the involvement of businesses in K–12 education. Therefore, the

bill requires that at least half the partnerships include business

partners. The Committee understands, though, that it may not be

appropriate or possible for business to participate in every partnership because, for example, no appropriate business is near a participating school district, or because the particular activities to be

undertaken by a partnership do not lend themselves to business

participation. While NSF should strive to involve businesses in as

many partnerships as possible, and must meet the 50 percent requirement, lack of business participation should never automatically disqualify a proposal.

The Committee wants to ensure that the partnerships are closely

evaluated and that information about successful partnerships is

widely disseminated. The Committee stresses the importance of indepth, quantitative assessments of the partnerships. The assessments should use common metrics to facilitate useful comparisons,

and should measure quantitative factors and not just attitudinal

changes. Assessment should be an integral part of partnership activities. NSF should work with the Department of Education to ensure that the effectiveness of the partnerships funded under this

Act can be compared with those created under H.R. 1.

SUBTITLE B—TEACHER RESEARCH SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

On March 7, 2001 the Committee held its first education hearing

entitled ‘‘K–12th Grade Math and Science Education: The View

from the Blackboard’’. One of of the themes the emerged from this

hearing was that the classroom can become a very ‘‘isolating space’’

for young mathematics and science teachers.

The Partnerships Act contains several provisions that are designed to mitigate this isolation and reintegrate elementary and

secondary school teachers into the wider professional world of

mathematics and scientists. The Teacher Research Scholarship

Program—modeled after successful programs developed by Cornell

University, Columbia University and the Department of Energy—

is designed to create opportunities for elementary and secondary

mathematics and science teachers to actively engage in research

projects without having to leave their teaching careers. The Committee expects that grant recipients will recruit teachers from a

35

wide array of urban, rural, and suburban school districts in order

to maximize the impact of the program.

The Teacher Research Scholarship Program requires that participating institutions provide programming and guidance to teachers,

as well as research opportunities, and allows up to 25 percent of

each grant to be used for programming. The Committee expects

that grant awardees will contribute some of their own resources to

programming, as well. (The remainder of the grant money is for

the scholarships, which are more exclusively a federal responsibility.)

Programming is essential to the success of the scholarship program. Programming should give teachers the background to understand the nature and implications of the research they are conducting, should deepen their understanding of the field in which

they are conducting research, should help them determine how

they can integrate their research experiences into their teaching,

should allow them to interact with other teachers and research institutions. The Committee intends that the quality of programming

be a major factor in determining grant awards.

TITLE II—NATIONAL SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING AND

TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION DIGITAL LIBRARY

In 1994 NSF, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency initiated

the National Digital Library Initiative (DLl). This initiative funds

research necessary to support the development of the next generation of digital libraries, to advance the use and usability of globally

distributed, networked information, and to encourage existing and

new users to focus on developing innovative applications and educational materials. The National Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education Digital Library (Digital Library),

supported by NSF as part of the initiative, also supports research

on the long-term social, behavioral and economic implications of

and effects of new digital libraries.

In 1998 the National Research Council, at the request of the National Science Board, convened a workshop to explore ways the

Digital Library could best support the efforts of elementary and

secondary school teachers to improve student achievement. The

workshop participants noted that a successful digital library would

‘‘differ from a traditional library in being not only used but created

by groups of people. Such a library would be constructed, collected,

and organized by a community of users.’’

Building on the recommendations derived from the workshop, the

Act authorizes NSF to award grants to institutions of higher education or other qualified entities to expand the Digital Library to

address the special needs of elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers. The expanded program may award

grants to: (1) coordinate and manage the library’s core collections

and services and to develop the library’s central portal; (2) develop,

aggregate and manage a subset of the library’s educational content

within a coherent theme or specialty (e.g., earth science); and, (3)

develop services which support users, collection providers, and

which enhance the impact, efficiency, and value of the library. The

Committee anticipates that the Digital Library will enable elementary and secondary teachers—including those most geographically

36

isolated—to share experiences, develop solutions to common problems and locate high quality educational materials and resources.

The Committee believes that, while the Internet is a source of a

great deal of information of potential value to teachers, the abundance of individual web sites and the lack of quality assurance renders this information of little use to teachers. The Digital Library

will utilize two mechanisms to ensure that educational resources

and materials accessible through the library are accurate, effective,

and relevant. First, resources and materials must be demonstrated

to be accurate and effective through peer review prior to being

made accessible through the Digital Library. Second, the Library

will provide a forum through which elementary and secondary

mathematics and science teachers can continuously review, critique, and improve upon materials and resources made accessible

through the library. Teachers themselves will have an opportunity

to actively review and shape the content of the library.

Some of the material that is accessible through the digital library

will have been developed and evaluated with funds made available

through this Act. The Committee is aware of excellent work to

digitize high quality instructional resources that is already being

done by non-profit entities like WGBH of Boston and WETA of

Washington, D.C. The Committee expects that the Director will

also draw upon the expertise of these and other qualified organizations and support their efforts to expand the content that is available through the Digital Library.

The Committee is also aware that many private sector entities

are attempting to create Internet portals to educational teaching

modules, curricular materials and practices. The Digital Library

must be designed and implemented in a way that does not impede

continued efforts to provide such resources and which encourages

the healthy private sector competition necessary to ensure the efficient development of quality resources.

TITLE III—STRATEGIC EDUCATION RESEARCH PROGRAM, SUBTITLE A—

CENTERS

The education of our nation’s children in grades K–12 consumes

approximately 7 percent of GDP; less than 0.03 percent of that is

invested in research on what educational techniques actually work

or on methods to improve teaching. In 1997, the President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) recommended that the nation’s education research investment be increased to 0.5 percent and that educational hypotheses be subjected

to appropriately rigorous evaluation involving large numbers of

children in authentic classroom environments.

In 1998, the National Research Council convened an expert panel

to evaluate new developments in the science of learning and the

relevance of these basic science findings to education. The Committee believes that many of the panel’s recommendations, summarized in the report How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and

School, could make a significant impact on the problems facing the

nation’s K–12 classrooms. Among the recommendations made by

the panel were to develop research questions based on problems of

consequence to classroom teachers; to find ways to convert research

knowledge into effective instructional methods; and to support

interdisciplinary collaborations of science and education researchVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.011 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
37

ers and practitioners. A subsequent document, How People Learn:

Bridging Research and Practice, further emphasized the need to

support ‘‘use-inspired’’ research focused on issues of importance to

teaching and learning.

Title III of this Act implements the recommendations of the National Research Council through the establishment of four interdisciplinary research centers, each focused on a significant problem

of importance to classroom educators. The Director is instructed to

consult with the National Academy of Science to select the research

focus of each of the centers, based on the current needs of the education practitioners. The Committee strongly believes that the

focus of each center on a particular research area—a strategic research effort—is critical to the success of the program. Failure to

identify a clear strategic focus will result in activities that spread

the research effort too thinly by trying to answer too many different questions.

The Committee believes that the centers must have two key

characteristics to succeed. The first is a commitment to interdisciplinary research. Each center must bring together researchers

from a wide variety of fields. Progress in understanding teaching

and learning is most likely to be made at the intersection of differing disciplines.

The second is a commitment to reducing research findings to

educational practice. Too often, new insights into teaching and

learning have no impact in the classroom either because teachers

are entirely unaware of them or have no idea how to incorporate

them into classroom practice. The centers must be designed to

overcome such barriers. The centers can ensure the relevance of

their research results in a variety of ways, including setting up

partnerships with particular schools or teachers. The Committee

intends that a major determinant in awarding grants under this

Title will be the ability of a proposed center to reduce its research

results to practice and to test and disseminate its recommended

practices. Moreover, practices should be tested in a variety of

schools—urban, suburban and rural—serving a variety of demographic groups.

The Committee recognizes the central, if intangible, role that motivation plays in the implementation of successful mathematics and

science education reform programs. Successful school leaders motivate teachers to actively participate in professional development

programs and to use new educational techniques and materials.

Similarly, successful teachers motivate students and their parents

to actively pursue not only the learning opportunities available in

school but those available after school as well. The Committee expects that the education research program will examine what is

known by cognitive science about motivation and develop ways that

this knowledge can more effectively be transferred to the classroom.

TITLE III, SUBTITLE B—STRATEGIC EDUCATION RESEARCH PROGRAM—

FELLOWSHIPS

On May 10, 2001, the Subcommittee on Research of the Committee on Science held a hearing entitled ‘‘Classrooms as Laboratories: The Science of Learning Meets the Practice of Teaching.’’ At

this hearing the witnesses testified that the gap between education

38

research and practice is driven primarily by the following factors:

(1) teachers do not have the time or resources to read the research

literature; (2) research findings are not written in ways that are

easily understandable or translatable to their daily classroom practice; and (3) researchers often lack any experience teaching in the

K–12 setting and do not adequately understand the demands or

limitations of this environment. The Committee believes it is important to actively encourage the participation of teachers in education research projects to ensure the relevance of the research to

actual classrooms, to facilitate the use of their classrooms for evaluation of materials and practices, and to enable teachers to make

distinctions between research-based methods and curricula and

those which are without a research foundation. The Partnerships

Act authorizes grants to institutions of higher education to provide

fellowships to encourage teachers to become part of the research

enterprise.

The Education Research Teacher Fellowship Program requires

that participating institutions provide programming and guidance

to teachers, as well as research opportunities, and allows up to 25

percent of each grant to be used for programming. The Committee

expects that grant awardees will contribute some of their own resources to programming, as well. (The remainder of the grant

money is for the fellowships, which are more exclusively a federal

responsibility.)

Programming is essential to the success of the fellowship program. Programming should give teachers the background to understand the nature and implications of the research they are conducting, should deepen their understanding of the field in which

they are conducting research, should help them determine how

they can integrate their research experiences into their teaching,

should allow them to interact with other teachers conducting research, and should help build continuing relationships between

teachers and research institutions. The Committee intends that the

quality of programming be a major factor in determining grant

awards.

TITLE IV—ROBERT NOYCE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

The single most important step needed to improve mathematics

and science education is to get smarter, better prepared teachers

into the classroom. As of now, we are not even producing enough

qualified mathematics and science teachers for our elementary and

secondary classrooms. A 1994 survey of school administrators revealed that 50% of all schools with openings for teachers in the

physical or life sciences had difficulty filling the positions. The

same was true for 40% of the schools with openings in mathematics.

As a result, school districts have been forced to hire teachers inadequately prepared for the classroom. In 1994, 21% of all public

school teachers lacked even a minor in their primary field and 59%

had less than a minor in their secondary teaching field. The problem is even greater in mathematics and science. The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, a non-partisan commission established with initial funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York, reported in 1996

that out-of-field teachers teach 56% of all high school students takVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.012 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
39

ing physical science and 27% of high school students taking mathematics.

Recognizing that the most powerful predictor of higher student

achievement in mathematics and science is a fully certified teacher

who majored in the field being taught, the Committee believes that

it is critical that steps be taken to encourage the brightest of our

Nation’s mathematics, science and engineering majors to pursue

careers as elementary and secondary mathematics and science

teachers. The Noyce Scholarship Progam—named for Robert Noyce,

an inventor of the integrated circuit—represents an effort to attract

these students to careers in teaching by offering them scholarships

in exchange for a commitment to teach for two years for each year

of scholarship received.

This program is designed to attract a diverse, talented group of

science, mathematics, engineering and technology students to careers as high performing elementary and secondary school teachers. The Director should select institutions of higher education that

have demonstrated their ability to attract talented science, mathematics, engineering and technology majors and minors from diverse

backgrounds and have a plan to recruit and prepare them for successful teaching careers. The Committee recognizes that there are

many measures of academic proficiency and success but believes

that scholarship recipients should maintain a grade point average

of at least 3.0 and should be among the top performing students

in the departments.

The Noyce Scholarship Program is intended to do more than distribute scholarship money to students. A critically important feature of this Title is that participating universities must provide

programming to enable scholarship recipients to become skilled

teachers and to encourage them to continue teaching once their

service requirement has been fulfilled. Programming should be provided both while scholarship recipients are undergraduates and

while they are fulfilling their service requirement. Programming

could include providing classes toward teaching certification, offering student teaching opportunities, providing students with K–12

teachers as mentors, and bringing scholarship recipients back to

campus for annual conferences while they are teaching. The Committee intends that the quality of programming to be offered to

scholarship recipients be a major factor in determining grant

awards.

The Committee also believes that a large number of professional

mathematicians, scientists, and engineers would like to teach but

lack the teaching credentials required to make the transition into

a teaching career. The Noyce Scholarship Program will offer stipends to these professionals to enable them to take the coursework

they need to become certified teachers. As in the case of the scholarship program, the Committee believes that it is not enough to encourage mathematicians, scientists, and engineers to enter careers

in teaching. Academic programming must be provided by the institution of higher education during the early formative years of

teaching to ensure that these new teachers not only enter, but also

remain productive members of, the teaching profession.

The President has proposed a loan forgiveness program that provides financial incentives to mathematics and science majors after

they graduate to encourage them to enter careers in teaching. The

40

Noyce Scholarship Program is complementary to this effort while

being more comprehensive in scope. The Scholarship Program actively recruits students prior to graduation, prepares them for careers in teaching, and provides the support needed to enable them

to succeed during their early years of service. The Committee believes that the combination of the Noyce Scholarship Program and

the economic incentive of loan forgiveness will provide powerful

new tools for encouraging our best students to become high performing teachers.

In order for the full benefit of the Noyce Scholarship Program

(with or without other recruitment incentive programs) to be realized, participating institutions of higher education must develop

and implement high quality professional development programs,

closely follow the post-graduation classroom performance of their

scholarship recipients, and collect scholarship funds from students

who fail to fulfill their service obligations. The Committee recognizes that to be effective these activities require significant investments in program and administration at participating institutions

and has authorized funds to cover the costs of these activities.

The Noyce Scholarship Program requires that scholarship recipients serve for two years as an elementary or secondary science or

mathematics teacher for each year of scholarship received. The

Committee recognizes that circumstances can arise in which this

service requirement would pose an undue hardship upon the individual or their family and has authorized NSF to waive or suspend

the service or repayment requirements under these circumstances.

The Committee assumes that such circumstances would be rare.

They might include temporary or permanent disability, required

military service, or overseas deployment with a spouse serving in

the armed forces or U.S. Foreign Service.

TITLE V—REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH CENTERS

One of the primary objectives of this Act is to ensure that NSF

and institutions of higher education are fully engaged in improving

elementary and secondary mathematics and science education.

Title V of the Act requires the Director of NSF to ensure that every

new center grant that is awarded by the Foundation contains an

elementary or secondary school mathematics or science education

reform component. It is the Committee’s expectation that this requirement will encourage all applicants for center grants to think

more closely about the ways that they can aid education reform activities in their local communities and across the nation.

TITLE VI—EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH

The Higher Education Amendments of 1998 authorized the establishment of the Web-Based Education Commission to assess the

educational software available in retail markets for use by secondary and postsecondary students. The Commission called for federally sponsored education research focused on ‘‘high payback targets of educational opportunity, where present understanding of

learning theory supports technological innovations.’’ The Commission also endorsed previous recommendations of the President’s

Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology for a large-scale

program of empirical research to identify the technology-based eduVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.013 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
41

cational practices and approaches that produce improvements in

student learning.

Title VI of the Partnerships Act responds to these recommendations by authorizing a program to establish research centers at institutions of higher education to evaluate and improve the use of

information technologies in elementary and secondary mathematics

and science education. The objectives of this program are to develop methods to measure the effectiveness of applications of educational technology in improving student achievement; identify the

variables that influence the effectiveness of educational technologies in a variety of educational settings; and identify educational applications of information technology that contribute to

increased student achievement.

The Committee intends that the research provide information

that will inform the decisions of educators on which educational approaches and techniques based on the use of information technology work in classrooms and on the key factors that affect educational outcomes for particular educational settings. The Committee stresses the quantitative nature of the results sought in

terms of student performance and the importance of widespread

dissemination of the results of the research.

TITLE VII—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

The Web-Based Education Commission also called attention to

the lack of support for teachers in the use of educational technologies, including both intellectual support in how to integrate

technology into classroom instruction and technical support for the

equipment. Their report, The Power of the Internet for Learning,

indicates that only about 10 percent of teachers work in what could

be described as a high quality technologically supported environment. Even for the 20 percent of schools with district technology

coordinators, the Commission’s report cites surveys showing that

the average time to fix a technical problem is two days. The program created by section 706 is intended to develop local centers to

provide assistance to schools in selecting and maintaining appropriate information technologies and to help train teachers in how

to use technology in the classroom.

Further, the Committee believes that opportunities to bring the

technical expertise of graduate and undergraduate students to

teachers, as authorized under section 101(c)(3), should be exploited

whenever feasible. Computer literate post secondary students could

provide valuable assistance to teachers in how to use technology

and how to keep it working. Similarly, the educational technology

assistance program created by section 706 is intended to develop

local centers to provide assistance to schools in selecting and maintaining appropriate information technologies and to help train

teachers in how to use technology in the classroom.

The recent report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and

Technology Development points out that women and minorities

represent the fastest growing segments of the nation’s workforce

but comprise only a small fraction of scientists and engineers.

Nearly 70 percent of the S&E workforce consists of white males,

while approximately 15 percent are white females and only about

5 percent are African Americans or Hispanics. The future needs of

42

the economy cannot be met unless all segments of society are fully

represented in science and engineering careers. Two provisions of

the bill are especially designed to address this issue.

Section 701 of the bill establishes a pilot program to provide federal funding for improvements in science and mathematics education programs in schools in economically disadvantaged areas to

leverage private sector funding for undergraduate scholarships and

summer internships for talented students from these schools who

go on to pursue science and engineering studies. The Committee intends for NSF to make competitive awards to schools that demonstrate the greatest economic need and that are most successful

in obtaining commitments from the private sector for substantial

non-federal funding for scholarships and educational support activities. The Committee also expects NSF to carefully evaluate the effectiveness of the program, particularly in terms of the number of

participating students who obtain undergraduate degrees in

science, mathematics and engineering.

Section 702 of the bill authorizes funding for outreach grants

first authorized, but never funded, by section 3(c)(2) of the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992. These grants were intended to support collaborations between 2-year colleges and secondary schools to recruit and help prepare students for undergraduate courses in science, mathematics and technology. The

Committee expects NSF to give priority consideration in making

these awards to proposals that involve secondary schools with a

majority of students from groups that are underrepresented in the

science, mathematics and engineering workforce.

Title VII also authorizes two activities that NSF can clearly undertake under its existing authority. The Committee expects NSF

to carry out these activities regardless of whether they are included

in the final version of this Act. One activity is the awarding of competitive, merit-reviewed grants for the development of educational

materials on energy production and use, energy conservation, and

renewable energy for use in elementary and secondary schools. The

other is the awarding of a $10 million grant to a consortium composed of associate-degree granting colleges for the purpose of carrying out a pilot project to encourage women, minorities and persons with disabilities to enter and complete programs in mathematics, science, engineering and technology.

IX. COST ESTIMATE

Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(2) of the House of Representatives requires

each committee report accompanying each bill or joint resolution of

a public character to contain: (1) an estimate, made by such committee, of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out such

bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported, and

in each of the five fiscal years following such fiscal year (or for the

authorized duration of any program authorized by such bill or joint

resolution, if less than five years); (2) a comparison of the estimate

of costs described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph made by

such committee with an estimate of such costs made by any Government agency and submitted to such committee; and (3) when

practicable, a comparison of the total estimated funding level for

the relevant program (or programs) with the appropriate levels

under current law. However, House Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(3)(B)

43

provides that this requirement does not apply when a cost estimate

and comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional

Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act

of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the report

and included in the report pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause

3(c)(3). A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of

the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on Science prior to the filing of this report and is included

in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause

3(c)(3).

Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2) of the House of Representatives requires

each committee report that accompanies a measure providing new

budget authority (other than continuing appropriations), new

spending authority, or new credit authority, or charges in revenues

or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate, as required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and, when

practicable with respect to estimates of new budget authority, a

comparison of the total estimated funding level for the relevant

program (or programs) to the appropriate levels under current law.

H.R. 1858 does not contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that

the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 1858

does authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in

the Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which is contained in Section X of this report.

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

U.S. CONGRESS,

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,

Washington, DC, June 21, 2001.

Hon. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT,

Chairman, Committee on Science,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie Middleton.

Sincerely,

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).

Enclosure.

H.R. 1858—National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act

Summary: H.R. 1858 would authorize the appropriation of approximately $1.5 billion over the 2002–2006 period and $100 million after 2006 for education initiatives of the National Science

Foundation (NSF). This bill would authorize NSF to implement

several new grant and teacher scholarship programs related to

mathematics and science education, expand the NSF’s digital library of elementary and secondary education resources, and conduct several studies related to improving technology in education.

Most of the money authorized by this bill would fund a program

44

to establish partnerships between university researchers and local

school districts to improve the instruction of elementary and secondary science education.

Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1858 would result in outlays of

about $1.1 billion over the 2002–2006 period and an additional $459 million after 2006. H.R. 1858 would not affect direct spending

or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.

H.R. 1858 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1858 is shown in the following table. The costs

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

space, and technology).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending under current law:

Budget authority .................................................................. 25 0 0 0 0 0

Estimated outlays ................................................................ 3 10 8 1 0 0

Proposed changes:

Estimated authorization level ............................................. 0 317 314 314 299 299

Estimated outlays ................................................................ 0 42 186 273 290 290

Spending under H.R. 1858:

Estimated authorization level 1 ........................................... 25 317 314 314 299 299

Estimated outlays ................................................................ 3 52 194 274 290 290

1 $25 million was appropriated in 2001 for the digital library.

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R.

1858 would be enacted in fiscal year 2001, and that the amounts

authorized will be appropriated each year. In addition, based on information from NSF, CBO estimates that H.R. 1858 would authorize the appropriation of $3 million in 2002 for studies related to the

use of technology in education. Estimates of outlays for all activities are based on information from NSF and historical spending

patterns for similar programs.

Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1858 contains

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in

UMRA. The bill would authorize the Director of NSF to establish

grant programs that would provide about $1.5 billion over five

years; any costs incurred by state and local governments to apply

for and administer such grants would result from complying with

conditions of aid. The grants would benefit state and local governments, including local school districts and public universities, by

assisting them in improving mathematics, science, and technology

education.

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Julie Middleton; impact on

State, local, and tribal governments: Elyse Goldman; impact on the

private sector; Lauren Marks.

Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for

Budget Analysis.

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

H.R. 1858 contains no unfunded mandates.

45

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1) of the House of Representatives requires

each committee report to include oversight findings and recommendations required pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X. The

Committee on Science’s oversight findings and recommendations

are reflected in the body of this report.

XIII. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the House of Representatives requires

each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of a public

character to include a statement citing the specific powers granted

to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by

the bill or joint resolution. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution

of the United States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R.

1858.

XIV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 1858 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of

any advisory committee.

XV. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 1858 does not relate to the terms

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

XVI. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

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

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

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

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

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

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

SECTION 3 OF THE SCIENTIFIC AND ADVANCEDTECHNOLOGY ACT OF 1992

SEC. 3. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION.

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(d) EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director is authorized to make awards

on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis to associate-degree granting colleges, bachelor-degree granting institutions, or education

service agencies (or consortia thereof) to establish centers to assist elementary and secondary schools in the use of information

technology for mathematics, science, or technology instruction.

(2) ACTIVITIES.—Activities of centers funded under this subsection may include—

46

(A) helping schools evaluate their need for information

technology;

(B) training teachers on how to best use information technology in instruction; and

(C) providing other information and training to help

schools and teachers ensure that they have access to appropriate information technologies and are using them to maximum advantage.

(3) APPLICATION.—An application to receive funds under this

subsection shall include, at a minimum— (A) a description of the services that will be provided to

schools and teachers;

(B) a list of the schools expected to be served;

(C) a description of how the applicant will draw on the

expertise of its faculty and students to assist schools and

teachers; and

(D) a description of how the applicant will operate the

program after funding made available by this subsection

has expired.

(4) SELECTION.—In evaluating applications submitted under

paragraph (3), the Director shall consider, at a minimum— (A) the ability of the applicant to effectively carry out the

program;

(B) the number of schools and students who would be

served and their need for assistance;

(C) the extent to which the applicant has worked with

participating schools to ensure that priority problems

would be addressed by the assistance provided under this

subsection; and

(D) the ability of the applicant to continue to provide assistance after funding under this subsection has expired.

(5) AWARDS.—(A) The Director shall ensure, to the extent

practicable, that the program established by this subsection assists schools in rural, suburban, and urban areas.

(B) No institution shall receive funds under this subsection

for more than three years.

(6) REPORT.—Not later than April 1, 2005, the Director shall

provide a report to Congress assessing the success of the program funded under this subsection and the need of schools for

continued assistance, and, based on the experience with the program, recommending ways information technology assistance to

schools could be made more broadly available.

(7) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to

carry out this subsection $5,000,000 for each of the fiscal years

2002 through 2004.

(e) LEARNING COMMUNITY CONSORTIUM.—The Director is authorized to provide to a consortium composed of associate-degree granting colleges a grant in the amount of $10,000,000 for the purpose

of carrying out a pilot project to encourage women, minorities and

persons with disabilities to enter and complete programs in mathematics, science, engineering and technology.

ø(d)¿ (f) COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS.—

In carrying out this section, the Director shall consult, cooperate,

and coordinate, to enhance program effectiveness and to avoid duVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.017 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
47

plication, with the programs and policies of other relevant Federal

agencies. In carrying out subsection (c), the Director shall coordinate activities with programs receiving assistance under part B of

title I of the Higher Education Act of 1965.

ø(e)¿ (g) LIMITATION ON FUNDING.—To qualify for a grant under

this section, an associate-degree-granting college, or consortium

thereof, shall provide assurances adequate to the Director that it

will not decrease its level of spending of funds from non-Federal

sources on advanced scientific and technical education and training

programs.

ø(f)¿ (h) FUNCTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR.—In carrying out this Act,

the Director shall— (1) * * *

* * * * * * *

ø(g)¿ (i) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section—

(1) * * *

* * * * * * *

XVIII. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On June 13, 2001, a quorum being present, the Committee on

Science favorably reported the National Mathematics and Science

Partnerships Act, by a voice vote, and recommends its enactment.

XIX. STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND

OBJECTIVES

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

1858 are to improve the instruction of science, mathematics, engineering and technology education in elementary and secondary

schools, increase the number of mathematics, science or engineering majors who pursue teaching careers, and to increase the performance of American students to internationally competitive levels.

The Committee requires that all of the programs authorized

under the Partnerships Act be awarded on the basis of a competitive, merit-review process. This process is expected to ensure that

only those projects that hold the most promise for contributing to

state and local education reform efforts will receive funding. In addition, the Act subjects each project and program to rigorous accountability and assessment requirements. Each project and program must incorporate performance benchmarks and assessments

in the design of the project or program to ensure that the project

or program will be able to identify methods and materials that improve student achievement as well as identify those that impede

student achievement. One of the hallmarks of cutting edge scientific research is that one learns as much or more from negative

or unexpected outcomes as from successful or anticipated results.

The Committee expects that lessons from projects or programs that

do not meet initial expectations will also be widely disseminated

and incorporated into subsequent projects and programs.

Title I of H.R. 1858 authorizes the Director of NSF to award

grants to institutions of higher educations or eligible non-profit organizations to establish mathematics and science partnership programs. The program is designed to test a diverse range of proposals

48

with an equally diverse range of objectives. In general, however,

the program is expected to contribute to the reform of elementary

and secondary mathematics and science curricula, expand the number of high quality professional development programs for teachers,

improve the quality of classroom instruction, and to develop partnership models that can serve as the foundation for state and local

reform activities.

Title II of H.R. 1858 authorizes the Director of NSF to expand

the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology

Education Digital Library to provide timely and continuous dissemination of K–12 science, mathematics, engineering, and technology educational resources, materials, practices, and policies

through the internet and other digital technologies. The performance objective of this program is to improve the quality of classroom instruction by increasing the access of mathematics and

science teachers to peer reviewed resources and providing a forum

through which they can exchange ideas, share experiences, and

contribute to the continuous improvement of educational materials

Title III of the Act authorizes the Director of NSF to establish

four multidisciplinary education research centers. The general performance objective for this program is to stimulate multidisciplinary research that bridges the current gap between cognitive

science and education research and generates results that are readily transferable to the classroom.

Title IV of the Partnerships Act authorizes the establishment of

the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program. The objective of this program is to encourage talented mathematics, science, engineering,

or technology majors, who would otherwise not pursue careers as

elementary or secondary mathematics or science teachers, to enter

and remain in careers as high performing teachers. Title IV also

authorizes a stipend program to encourage mathematics, science,

or engineering professionals to pursue careers as teachers. The objective of this program is to encourage talented professionals, who

would otherwise not pursue careers as elementary or secondary

mathematics or science teachers, to undertake to careers as high

performing teachers.

Title V of the Act requires the Director of NSF to ensure that all

new center grants awarded by the Foundation include an elementary and secondary mathematics or science education program element. The performance objective of this program is to encourage

broader participation by institutions of higher education in elementary and secondary mathematics and science education reform activities.

Title VI of the Act authorizes a program to establish research

centers at institutions of higher education to evaluate and improve

the use of information technologies in elementary and secondary

mathematics and science education. The objectives of this program

are to develop methods to measure the effectiveness of applications

of educational technology in improving student achievement; identify the variables that influence the effectiveness of educational

technologies in a variety of educational settings; and identify educational applications of information technology that contribute to

increased student achievement.

Title VII of the Performance Act authorizes the Director to establish mathematics and science proficiency partnerships. The objecVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.018 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
49

tives of this program are to encourage the development of partnerships between schools and businesses that improve the quality of

elementary and secondary science and mathematics instruction and

to encourage economically disadvantaged students to enroll in college.

Section 703 also authorizes the Director to award a grant to a

consortium of community colleges for a pilot program testing ways

to encourage women, minorities, and persons with disabilities to

enter and complete programs in science, mathematics, engineering,

and technology (SMET). The goal of this program is to identify and

demonstrate effective ways to attract these students to SMET programs and to improve their retention and graduation rates.

XX. EXCHANGE OF COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,

Washington, DC, June 25, 2001.

Hon. JOHN BOEHNER,

Chairman, House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN BOEHNER: Thank you for your letter of June 26,

2001 regarding H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science

Partnerships Act.

I appreciate your waiving your Committee’s right to a referral on

this bill so that it can move expeditiously to the floor. I recognize

your Committee’s jurisdiction in this area and will support any request you may make to have conferees on H.R. 1858 or similar legislation.

The exchange of letters between our two committees will be included in the Committee report on H.R. 1858 and will be made part

of the floor record.

Sincerely,

SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, Chairman.

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

AND THE WORKFORCE,

Washington, DC, June 26, 2001.

Hon. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, Chairman, Committee on Science, Rayburn HOB, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN BOEHLERT: Thank you for working with me regarding your bill, H.R. 1858, the ‘‘National Mathematics and

Science Partnerships Act’’, which was referred to the Committee on

Science and in addition the Committee on Education and the Workforce and ordered favorably reported by your Committee on June

13, 2001. I understand your desire to have this legislation considered expeditiously by the House; hence, I do not intend to hold a

hearing or markup on this legislation.

In agreeing to waive consideration by our Committee, I would expect you to agree that this procedural route should not be construed to prejudice the Committee on Education and the

Workforce’s jurisdictional interest and prerogatives on this or any

similar legislation and will not be considered as precedent for consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my Committee in

50

the future. I would also expect your support in my request to the

Speaker for the appointment of conferees from my Committee with

respect to matters within the jurisdiction of my Committee should

a conference with the Senate be convened on this or similar legislation.

I would appreciate your including our exchange of letters in your

Committee’s report to accompany H.R. 1858. Again, I thank you for

working with me in developing this legislation and I look forward

to working with you on these issues in the future.

Sincerely,

JOHN BOEHNER,

Chairman.

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,

Washington, DC, July 9, 2001.

Hon. BILLY TAUZIN,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN TAUZIN: Thank you for your letter regarding

H.R. 1858, the ‘‘National Mathematics and Science Partnership

Act.’’ Although the Parliamentarian did not refer H.R. 1858 to the

Committee on Energy and Commerce, I understand your concern

with the bill as amended.

While sec. 704 of Title VII of H.R. 1858, ‘‘Study of Broadband

Network Access for Schools and Libraries,’’ requires the Director of

the National Science Foundation to conduct a study of high-speed,

large bandwidth capacity access to all public elementary and secondary schools and libraries, it is not the intent of the Committee

on Science to encroach upon your Committee’s jurisdiction in the

broadband area. Sec. 704 merely requires a study of network access, it does not pierce the Energy and Commerce Committee’s telecommunications jurisdiction.

The Committee on Science intends to bring H.R. 1858 to the floor

under suspension of the rules, and would therefore not be subject

to amendments. If, however, during future Congressional deliberations of H.R. 1858, the bill is altered to actually include subject

matter falling within the Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction, we will work with your Committee to address those issues

of concern, including the honoring of your request for conferees

should any subsequent version contain a provision that falls within

your jurisdiction. We do not anticipate any encroachment into your

jurisdiction and will resist effort to do so.

I will include the exchange of letters between our Committees as

part of the record. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, Chairman.

51

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, Washington, DC, July 9, 2001.

Hon. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT,

Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR CHAIRMAN BOEHLERT: I am writing with regard to H.R.

1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnership Act. As

you know, H.R. 1858 was ordered reported, amended, by the Committee on Science on June 13, 2001.

During the Committee on Science markup, section 704 of title

VII was added to the bill. This section added a study to be done

by the Director of the National Science Foundation concerning

broadband network access for schools and libraries. As you are

aware, under Clause 1(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the House, the

Committee on Energy and Commerce has jurisdiction over the regulation of interstate and foreign communications, including

broadband network access.

I recognize your desire to bring this legislation before the House

in an expeditious manner. Accordingly, I will not exercise the Committee’s right to seek a referral on any provision that may be within our jurisdiction. By agreeing to waive its consideration of the

bill, however, the Energy and Commerce Committee does not waive

any jurisdiction over H.R. 1858, or any provisions that may be

added to the legislation. In addition, the Energy and Commerce

Committee reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any HouseSenate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I ask

for your commitment to support any request by the Energy and

Commerce Committee for appropriate conferees on H.R. 1858 or

similar legislation.

I request that you include this letter as a part of the Committee’s

report on H.R. 1858 and as part of the Record during consideration

of the legislation on the House floor.

Thank you for your attention to these matters.

Sincerely,

W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN,

Chairman.

XXI. PROCEEDINGS OF SUBCOMMITTEE MARKUP

H.R. 1858, NATIONAL MATHEMATICS AND

SCIENCE PARTNERSHIPS ACT

JUNE 7, 2001

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH, Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in room

2318 of the Rayburn Building, Hon. Nick Smith (chairman of the

subcommittee) presiding.

Chairman SMITH. The Subcommittee on Research will come to

order. Barry are you counting? Oh, shucks. One, two, three, four,

52

five. So we are really—have come to order then. Good morning. The

Subcommittee on Research is meeting today to consider the following measures, two bills. One is H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnership Act, and H.R. 100, the National

Science Education Act.

[Markup Notification follows:]

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH,

Washington, DC, June 5, 2001.

MEMORANDUM

To: All Members, Subcommittee on Research.

From: Nick Smith, Chairman.

Subject: Subcommittee Markup of H.R. 1858 and H.R. 100.

Pursuant to notice, the Subcommittee on Research, Committee on Science, intends

to consider the following measures on Thursday, June 7th at 10:00 a.m. in Room

2318 of the Rayburn Building.

H.R. 1858, National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act; and,

H.R. 100, National Science Education Act.

Should you have amendments to these measures, please hand deliver them to:

Natalie Palmer, B–374 RHOB, no later than 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, June 6th.

In keeping with Committee precedent, all amendments should be drafted by the Office of Legislative Counsel.

Attached are markup materials for your information. If you have any questions,

please call Sharon Hays, Staff Director, or Natalie Palmer, Staff Assistant, at 5– 7858.

Chariman SMITH. I would ask unanimous consent for the authority to recess the Subcommittee at any point and without objection

it is so ordered.

Let me make a couple remarks and then we will turn it over to

our esteemed Ranking Member and the Chairman of the Full Committee for remarks.

Today the Subcommittee meets to consider two bills that address

an issue that I think most of us consider crucial to our national security and future prosperity. In fact, I have told the Vice-President

of the Administration that I consider our performance in science

and math education in K through 12 to probably be at least the

second greatest national security threat to this nation. The education of our children, that our children receive a math and science

education is extremely important.

We talk often on this Subcommittee of the important role that

fundamental research plays in our current prosperity. We are in

the midst of a technological revolution that has driven our economy, improved our productivity, and helped us live longer and

healthier lives. A revolution fueled in large part by our past investment in research and development but this research and development is in turn enabled by the investment we make educating our

children in math and science and the success of motivation in that

education process.

The two bills that we consider today take important steps to

manage that investment. The most recent results of the trends in

mathematics and science study show that our efforts to improve

math and science education have had some success but overall

have been ineffective in really significantly raising the U.S. performance from its middle-of-the-pack position. And while there are

some highlights, my own state of Michigan, for example, achieved

the top U.S. scores in both math and science, might be a bright

spot but even with Michigan’s scores relatively compared to the G–

53

7 country’s, not too impressive. We need to work harder to make

these bright spots the norm and not the exception.

The President’s plan to improve education, No Child Left Behind,

I think highlights the importance of partnerships between the K

through 12 system and institutions of higher education in leading

the math and science and education reform effort.

The Chairman’s bill, the first bill that we are going to consider

today, H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnership Act, is the realization of this partnership plan. It is what has

been suggested by the President of the United States, and I hope

that we can conclude that in a way that the Administration is suggesting.

The centerpiece of the legislation, Title I, Mathematics and

Science Education Partnerships, authorizes a competitive grant

program at the National Science Foundation to enable institutions

of higher learning to partner with the local school districts.

The bill authorizes the President’s request of the 200 million per

year for fiscal year 2002 through 2006. The bill includes a number

of other provisions and—that relates to engineering and technology

education and the digital library. This program and an additional

fellowship program I hope we will adopt in the Manager’s Amendment form the bulk of our own educational research legislation.

The Strategic Education Research Program addresses the need to

bridge the gap between basic research on learning and classroom

practice.

And the bill authorizes the NSF-funded centers for research on

learning and education improvement.

I want to thank Chairman Boehlert for working with me and

other members of the Subcommittee in crafting this bill and for

this—the effort of this Committee and the effort of the Chairman

to make this come to fruition.

And the Chair, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, the Chair

would ask our Ranking Member to make her comments and then

we will come to you. Eddie Bernice Johnson.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am

pleased that the Subcommittee is moving forward this morning to

markup legislations, improve science and mathematics education in

elementary and secondary schools.

I congratulate you for your efforts to bring this about and thank

Chairman Boehlert for placing science education high on the agenda for the committee this year.

Over the past two Congresses the Science Committee has conducted a comprehensive series of hearings that have examined all

aspects of K through 12 science and math education. I believe that

the legislation we will consider today is well supported by the testimony we have received. It is now time to move it forward. The

Democratic members of the Committee have separately developed

several legislative proposals on science and math education.

In addition they joined Ranking Member Hall in developing a

comprehensive education bill. That is H.R. 1693, which Mr. Hall introduced earlier this year. I am pleased that many of the programs

and activities set out in these bills have been included in the Manager’s Amendment of H.R. 1858, which we will soon take up.

54

This includes the Mathematics and Science Proficiency Partnership Act, which I have introduced in this and in the past two Congresses.

Mr. Chairman, we have been engaged in a collegial process to develop a bipartisan committee product in which I believe we may all

take pride. I want to commend Chairman Boehlert and Chairman

Smith for both of you and your willingness to work cooperatively

with Democratic members and thank you for bringing up the legislation before the Subcommittee today. I look forward to seeing it

reported to the Full Committee and to the House. Thank you.

Chairman SMITH. The Chair is glad to recognize the sponsor of

the bill and the Chairman of our Science Committee.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This

is an important day for this Committee because in addition to our

normal work of having a positive impact on the shaping of public

policy overall in the science arena, we have made it clear right

from the beginning of this year that we are going to be players in

the arena as we deal with shaping education, energy, and environmental policy. And today we are fulfilling a part of that commitment.

We are making up two excellent bipartisan bills that demonstrate the commitment we made at the beginning of the year

that the Science Committee would be an important, productive contributor to the effort to improve education. Both these bills draw

on the strengths of the National Science Foundation to shore up

science and math education in ways that would be difficult for

other agencies to accomplish. I think NSF is uniquely positioned to

make a significant contribution.

The fundamental purpose of the bills is to insure that we are

drawing on the expertise and resources of higher education and of

businesses to improve K through 12 education. And in this instance

I would urge my colleagues on the other side of the Capitol to take

note of what we are doing here. The Manager’s Amendment reflects

a model, bipartisan agreement that improves the bill and incorporates aspects of legislation introduced by you, Mr. Chairman, by

the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, by Ms. Woolsey among others.

The point I wish to stress is that every step of the way in this

process there has been no divide at the center in this room. Republicans and Democrats have worked cooperatively to fashion this

package.

Once again, I would urge my colleagues on the other side of the

Capitol to take note of what we are doing here. I am delighted that

we have been able to accomplish this in such a bipartisan fashion.

And I also want to make note of something else that is in the

package. We reauthorized the Noyce Scholarship Program. That is

something that Senator Rockefeller and I several years ago were

able to get passed by the Congress and signed into law. It was

great because we authorized money for stipends for the best and

the brightest in math and science and engineering in our undergraduate programs to incentivise them to go into teaching in public

education.

The problem is, and this often happens on the Hill, the authorization was there, and we all applauded. The appropriations never

followed. We are going to be persevering as we go forward to try

55

to make certain we also get the money to match—the wallet to

match the will, if you will.

So let me say to everyone in this room associated with this package, job well done, and let us continue. Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and without objection all members may place opening statements in the record.

We will now consider H.R. 1858 and—for the first reading of the

bill, and I would ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered

read and open to amendment at any time. Without objection it is

so ordered. We will move to the first amendment on the bill and

which the—is the Manager’s Amendment offered by myself and

Representative Johnson.

And I would ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered en Bloc. Without objection it is so ordered.

The clerk will read the amendment.

Madam CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1858.

Chairman SMITH. That is enough. I would ask for unanimous

consent that the amendment be considered read. Thank you very

much. Without objection it is ordered.

I recognize myself for five minutes to explain this bipartisan

amendment.

This amendment has been worked out with the—both Republicans and Democrats, and Ms. Johnson has agreed to cosponsor it.

I know members and staff have had an opportunity to review the

amendment so I will just try to summarize some of the highlights

briefly.

Title III has been expanded to include an Education Research

Teacher Fellowship Program, a provision originally included in my

education research legislation. This program similar to the Teacher

Research Scholarship Program in Title I focuses on creating opportunities for elementary and secondary teachers to pursue research

on learning in university laboratories and elsewhere with a goal of

helping bridge the gap between the basic research and the classroom.

The amendment would authorize $5 million to NSF to carry out

this section. The amendment also modifies the Robert Noyce Scholarship Provisions of the original bill by changing the penalty assessed on the scholarship recipients who don’t complete the teaching service requirement.

In addition the amendment adds the Mathematics and Science

Proficiency Partnerships Program originally introduced by our

Ranking Member Ms. Johnson, a measure this Committee passed

last year.

It also adds a provision authorizing articulation partnerships between community colleges and secondary schools, assessment of inservice teacher professional development programs, and educational technology research centers.

Again, this is a bipartisan amendment, and I am pleased to be

joined by my Ranking Member in offering it. Now I would like to

yield to Ms. Johnson for any comment she may have on the amendment.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to join

you in offering this bipartisan amendment to H.R. 1858 and incorVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.024 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
56

porates substantial portions of H.R. 1693, the Democratic Science

Education Bill, introduced by Ranking Member Hall.

H.R. 1693, in turn, contains a range of provisions from the

Democratic members that have appeared at separate bills and legislative proposals before the Committee during the last Congress.

I want to commend the collegial process through which this

amendment was developed. I believe we all approach this matter

with an appreciation of the importance of finding creative and effective ways to address the serious deficiencies that now exist in

K through 12 science and math education.

The Manager’s Amendment and underlying bill comprise of a

range of proposals from several members on both sides of the aisle

on ways to improve teacher training, to attract more talented students to careers as science and math teachers, and to develop more

effective education materials and teaching practices to improve student learning.

It also authorizes new research programs to improve the scientific bases for teacher techniques and education materials, as

well as to determine the effectiveness of new education approaches

on student performance.

Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate you and Chairman Boehlert for your hard work in developing this amendment and bringing

the measure forward to a markup today. I want to acknowledge the

efforts of Ranking Member Hall in developing 1693 and my colleagues on this side of the aisle who contributed provisions to this

bill.

I am particularly pleased that the Manager’s Amendment incorporates the Math and Science Proficiency Partnership Act, H.R.

1660, which I introduced this year and in the past two Congresses.

My legislation is a targeted measure. It seeks to bring schools with

large populations of economically-disadvantaged students together

in partnership with businesses to improve math and science education and to recruit and support students in undergraduate education in science and technology fields.

The components of the partnership will include support from the

National Science Foundation to the schools for teacher training,

educational materials, and equipment. Industry will provide support for college scholarships for promising students, job site mentoring, and internship programs and donations of computer software and hardware. The overall effect of the partnerships would be

to encourage support from promising students from undergraduate—underrepresented groups in pursuing careers in science

and engineering. And I want to urge my colleagues to support the

Manager’s Amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Congresswoman Johnson, and our

compliments to you also and all the members. Is there any additional discussion? If not, the vote——

Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Honda. Yes.

Mr. HONDA. Thank you. I would like to move to strike the last

word and——

Chairman SMITH. Please proceed with your comments.

Mr. HONDA. Okay. Thank you. As a former science teacher, Mr.

Chair, I am thrilled that this Subcommittee is marking up legislaVerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:14 Jul 14, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B134P1.025 pfrm04 PsN: B134P1
57

tion that will improve the quality of science and math education in

our schools.

I haven’t been in our schools for many years as a teacher. I understand that America’s teachers are in great need of technology

training as well as new and challenging curriculum. And I have

been working on two proposals that I believe address these needs

in part.

First I would like to see more qualified college students in our

schools assisting teachers to better integrate technology in our

classroom curriculum.

And second, in the midst of this terrible energy crisis I think

that we need to renew our effort to educate our children on energy

conservation and renewable energies. We need to prepare them to

be smart and critical energy consumers.

I am working with the Majority to develop these ideas into

amendments to H.R. 1858, and I also appreciate the willingness of

the Chair and the Majority to work with me on this effort. And I

look forward to developing more concrete language that we all can

agree to.

And let me just also recognize that I do believe that our Committees here is truly working in a bipartisan manner, and I sincerely

appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Honda. Mr. Etheridge.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief but let

me thank you and the—all the folks who have worked on this because I think it is important. One of the pieces that I am very

pleased to see in here because I think all of us understand that if

we are going to improve math and science education, we have to

do a much better job of in-service training because the challenge

of getting new people in is always going to be a challenge. But the

real critical piece to improve it and do it quickly certainly at the

high school level is how well we do for the in-service for the people

we already have there. And this partnership that is going to be

able to be developed here between higher education and the public

schools I think will add an awful lot to enhancing and enriching

and moving that along much more rapidly.

And I thank you and commend the bill.

Chairman SMITH. We appreciate your comments. Your experience

in education and as superintendent of schools for North Carolina

is appreciated as we move ahead on the bill. Other discussion? If

not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor will signify by

saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair the

ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.

Are there any further amendments?

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Hearing none the question is on the bill, H.R.

1858 as amended. Are you ready to vote? All those in favor will say

aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. The ayes have it, and you might

have to—Ms. Johnson, did you want to make a comment?

Ms. JOHNSON. I was just going to move that we—— Chairman SMITH. Oh, yes. The motion. Okay. Good.

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Subcommittee favorably report the bill, H.R. 1858, as amended to the Full Committee with the recommendation that it be an order for the bill as

amended by Subcommittee and incorporate it into an amendment

58

in the nature of a substitute for consideration as an original bill

for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule at Full

Committee.

Further, I ask unanimous consent that the staff be instructed to

make all necessary technical and conforming changes to the bill as

amended in accordance with the recommendations of the Subcommittee.

Chairman SMITH. The Committee has heard the motion. Those in

favor will say aye. Aye. Those opposed no. The ayes have it, and

the Chair notes the presence of a quorum. Now we will consider— oh, thank you, Peter. Without objection the motion to reconsider is

laid on the table. The—— [H.R. 1858 follows:]

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP

H.R. 1858, NATIONAL MATHEMATICS AND

SCIENCE PARTNERSHIPS ACT

JUNE 13, 2001

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,

Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.

Boehlert (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Meeting will come to order. The first order

of business is to welcome back Mr. Gilchrest to the Committee. By

order of the Republican caucus of the House Committee on Science,

Mr. Gilchrest will fill the vacancy on the Environment, Technology,

and Standards Subcommittee. Without objection, so ordered. The

Committee on Science will be in order. Pursuant to notice, the

Committee on Science is meeting today to consider the following

measures. H.R. 1858, National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act, and H.R. 100, National Science Education Act. I ask

unanimous consent for the authority to recess the Committee at

any point and without objection, so ordered. I ask unanimous consent for the substitutes to H.R. 1858 and H.R. 100, as adopted by

the Subcommittee on Research on June 7, 2001, be considered as

original text for the purpose of the Markup at Full Committee

today.

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

Washington, DC, June 7, 2001.

MEMORANDUM

To: Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman.

From: Nick Smith, Chairman, Subcommittee on Research.

Re Subcommittee Mark-up of H.R. 1858.

On June 7, 2001, the Subcommittee on Research held a mark-up of H.R. 1858,

National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act. A Manager’s Amendment was

offered by Mr. Smith and Ms. Johnson and was adopted by a voice vote.

Attached for your information is a section by section analysis and a copy of the

measure.

129

130

131

132

133

Chairman BOEHLERT. Hearing no objections, so ordered.

The Committee will now consider H.R. 1858. I want to welcome

everyone to today’s Science Committee’s first Full Committee

markup of this Congress. I’m going to keep my remarks brief because I would like swift, smooth markups to be one of the Committee’s hallmarks. When I was privileged to become Chairman of this

Committee in January, I said that we would strive to have an impact on key issues facing the country. Specifically, education, energy policy and the environment. I also said I hoped we would work

in a bipartisan fashion that would be a model for the entire Congress. With the help of my colleagues and the Committee staff on

both sides of the aisle, today, we are carrying through on those

pledges.

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

Chairman BOEHLERT. We have before us two thoughtful, innovative, bipartisan bills that should have a significant impact on improving pre-college education. Both my bill and Dr. Ehlers’ bill are

designed to ensure that the resources and expertise of higher education and the business community are brought to bear on K

through 12 education. And both bills recognize that the most essential element of education is ensuring that we have the brightest,

most creative, best prepared teachers in our nation’s classrooms.

Everything else is just icing on the cake.

Both bills have benefited from guidance on both sides of the

aisle. My bill, for example, builds on the recommendations of President Bush, who in his budget, recognized the important education

role of the National Science Foundation and of partnerships.

It also includes a number of proposals that originated with Committee Democrats and were included in Mr. Hall’s education package, H.R. 1653. And it includes my proposal of the Noyce Scholarships, which the concept was developed several years ago on a bipartisan basis with Senator Rockefeller. This is designed to attract

top math and science majors into teaching.

This is the way to pull together an education bill. Reach across

the aisle, avoid ideological disputation, stick to practical ways the

Federal Government can catalyze reform. I hope we can stick to

these principles when we report out an energy bill next month.

At any rate, H.R. 1858 and H.R. 100 are bills everyone on this

Committee can be proud of and, most important, they should make

a difference to America’s students. H.R. 1858 has already been endorsed by a number of education groups and more will be signing

on in the coming weeks. There is already bipartisan interest in the

bill in the Senate. And we expect to bring this bill to the floor rapidly, where it should pass easily.

So these bills are not just statements of position or rhetorical exercises. We expect them to become law. And we will work with the

appropriators and the National Science Foundation to see that they

begin helping America’s students as soon as possible.

Before turning to Mr. Hall, just let me say, I’d like to congratulate the excellent work of the very able professional staff, Republican and Democrat alike. We are all in this together and you have

done us proud. Mr. Hall?

[Statement of Ralph M. Hall follows:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RALPH HALL

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join you in support of this important legislation

to strengthen science and mathematics education in the nation’s schools.

I congratulate you for placing science education high on the Committee’s agenda

for this year and for taking the steps necessary to move this legislation forward.

The bill before the Committee is the result of bipartisan effort.

It is composed of several programs and activities authorized for the National

Science Foundation. I believe the extensive hearing record the Committee has compiled over the past three years provides ample support for the provisions of the bill.

The Democratic Members of the Committee have separately developed several legislative proposals to improve K–12 science and math education. In addition, with

their help, I developed a comprehensive education bill, HR 1693, which I introduced

earlier this year.

I am pleased that many of the programs an activities set out in these Democratic

bills are included in the Committee markup vehicle before us.

In particular, I would like to highlight the programs incorporated from HR 1693

that explore ways to effectively use educational technologies in the classroom. The

emphasis is on determining the techniques and approaches that lead to improved

181

student performance, so that schools will know which approaches actually work and

are worth the substantial investments involved in implementing them.

Also, the markup vehicle incorporates programs from HR 1693 to encourage and

support women and minorities in pursuing careers in science and engineering. The

changing composition of the nation’s workforce makes it essential that the talents

of all segments of society are fully developed and utilized.

We will soon consider a managers’ amendment, which I am co-sponsoring with the

Chairman, that incorporates several additional provisions championed by Democratic Members.

Mr. Chairman, I want to acknowledge the collegial process through which this bipartisan legislation has been developed. And, I want to congratulate Chairman Nick

Smith and Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson of the Research Subcommittee

for their efforts to develop the bill.

Finally, I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your willingness to work cooperatively with Democratic Members to develop this legislation, and for bringing it before the Committee today.

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And I am, of

course, pleased to join you in support of this very important legislation to strengthen science and mathematics education in the nation’s school. And I admire the way that you are running this Committee. I have some problems, though, I know there is going to be

a time when your unanimous consent requests are going to be more

interesting when we get to energy. I want to wait and see exactly

how you handle that. I congratulate you, of course, for placing

science education on the Committee’s agenda for this year. And you

have done that. You have put it up front. And I think that is where

it belongs. And that is what our President has indicated, his interest in education and furthering some areas of improvement of this

very important facet of our Nation’s economy and our Nation’s future.

The bill before the Committee is a result, as you say, of bipartisan effort that is composed of several programs and activities authorized for the National Science Foundation. I think the extensive

hearing record that the Committee compiled over the last 3 years,

which, Mr. Chairman, you have been here and been a part of, provides ample support for the provisions of the bill. And that may be

another reason why we will slide right on through this presentation today and I think you have deadened the timber over in the

Senate for it and that is an admirable thing to do.

The Democratic members of the Committee have separately developed some legislative proposals to improve K–12 science and

math education. In addition to their help, we have developed a

comprehensive education bill, H.R. 1693, which as the Chairman

has said, I introduced earlier this year. I am pleased that many of

the programs and activities set out in these Democratic bills are included in the Committee Markup vehicle before us today. In particular, I would like to highlight the programs incorporated from

H.R. 1693 that explore ways to effectively use educational technologies in the classroom. Now, the emphasis is on determining the

techniques and approaches that lead to improve student performance. So that helps schools to know which approaches actually

work. And I think they are worth the substantial investments that

are involved and it is good to know that they understand this to

the point that they will use those investments involved in implementing them.

Also, the Markup vehicle incorporates programs from H.R. 1693

to encourage and support women and minorities in pursuing careers in science and engineering.

182

And, Mr. Chairman, with all the talk of opening up our borders

to bring people in from oversees to man the positions of labor and

even management and skilled people that they are talking about

increasing immigration for that, I think that points up the importance of the changing composition of the Nation’s workforce. Make

it very essential that all segments of society are fully developed

and fully utilized. And that way, we are going to have to rely less

on having those from other countries come to take these very important jobs that we are supporting here.

Mr. HALL. So we will soon consider a Manager’s Amendment,

which I have co-sponsored with the Chairman that incorporates

several additional provisions, championed by members from both

sides. Mr. Chairman, I acknowledge the affordable process through

which this legislation has been developed. And I want to congratulate chairman Nick Smith and Ranking Member Eddie Bernice

Johnson of the Research Subcommittee for their efforts to develop

this bill.

And finally, Mr. Chairman, I want to, once again, thank you for

your willingness to work cooperatively with Democratic Members to

develop this legislation and for bringing it before the Committee

today. I yield back my time.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much for those kind remarks, Mr. Hall. Without objection, all members may place opening

statements in the record at this point. I ask unanimous consent

that the bill be considered as read and open to amendment at any

point. And I ask members to proceed with the statements in the

order on the roster.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB ETHERIDGE

Thank you Mr. Chairman for recognizing me. One of the most difficult challenges

we face today is getting well trained and qualified science and math teachers in

every classroom. One of the pieces that I am very pleased to see in this bill is an

amendment that directs the National Science Foundation to establish a program to

improve the undergraduate education and in-service professional development of

science and mathematics teachers in elementary and secondary school.

As the former Superintendent of Schools in North Carolina, I have worked for

many years to improve science and math education in our schools. We need betterqualified teachers in our K–12 science and math classrooms. There is a need for

teacher enhancement and professional development for current teachers. Our teachers are not being adequately prepared in both the content and the techniques of

teaching. At the very root of our problems is Teacher Preparation. In the long run,

we would benefit more if we allocate resources to invest more in the undergraduate

preparation of teachers.

There is growing recognition that the success of nearly any effort to improve the

academic performance of America’s students depends critically upon their teachers’

mastery of subject matter and their ability to teach it. The way to lift student

achievement is to ensure that we have a qualified teacher in every classroom.

Therefore, if America is to improve its public schools, teacher preparation and enhancement must become the first priority of education reform. I am pleased this bill

takes several steps in that direction.

Last year, I introduced a similar measure as an amendment to the bill the Science

Committee has passed but that was never enacted. This year I expanded on that

effort in the Hall bill and I am pleased H.R. 1858 builds on this function to

strengthen science education in America.

I urge adoption of this bill.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL M. HONDA

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let me begin by thanking Chairmen Boehlert and Smith, as well as Ranking

Members Hall and Johnson, for creating a climate of inclusiveness and cooperation.

183

This bill and its expeditious passage will be a testament to the great work that can

be accomplished when both sides of the aisle work together.

I ask for recognition today because there are two provisions within the Manager’s Amendment that I have offered.

The first provision authorizes the National Science Foundation to provide grants

to undergraduate and graduate students that go into our schools for the express

purpose of assisting our teachers better utilize computers.

It was once conventional wisdom that if we merely put computers in classrooms,

the quality of our children’s education would dramatically improve. No doubt, our

schools are better because of the presence of computers, but we have learned in

these few short years, that our teachers must be better trained and assisted if we

are to maximize the use of computers and the Internet in schools.

Many of our nation’s undergraduate and graduate students have expertise in computer science. We need to draw on this wealth of expertise, as well as the altruism

and idealism that so many of young people harbor.

By coupling the specific needs of our school systems with the energy and intellect

of some of the brightest people in our academic institutions, we can better begin to

prepare our children with the high tech skills they need to navigate, adapt and succeed in the Knowledge Economy.

But the challenges our children face will not be relegated to the career world. For

example, our children, one day, will address the same energy challenges that we

face today.

Future generations of Americans will need to continue the important work of creating a balanced energy portfolio on which our country can rely and prosper.

That is why I have included language in the Manager’s Amendment that would

make more explicit NSF’s responsibility to encourage the development of energy curriculum for primary and secondary school children.

In the midst of an energy crisis that is wreaking great havoc on the Western

states, our nation is giving more thought and consideration to the important role

that energy conservation and renewable energies can play in our energy portfolio.

It will be important to tap our children into this discussion as early as possible,

so that when they purchase homes, cars and dishwashers, they will be smart energy

consumers. We must not pass onto our children the myth that fossil fuels are the

only reliable and abundant source of energy for the United States.

My hope and expectation is that, one day, every school in America will offer students an energy curriculum that accurately reflects, not only the great energy demands we will face in coming years, but also the extraordinary resources that might

be available to us if only we invest ourselves in them. I speak of wind and solar

energy, as well as biomass and geothermal.

Such a curriculum must also speak to the great benefits of energy conservation.

As a California Member of Congress, I understand the importance of conservation,

but implementing such a system is not easy. It requires educating the public, so let’s start early * * * let’s teach our children to think more about the amount of energy

they use.

Again, I’m pleased that these provisions have been included in the Manager’s Amendment and I look forward to the Amendment’s passage.

As a former science teacher, principal and school board member, I’m extraordinarily pleased that this Committee is marking up such a strong, bipartisan

science education bill that, in my opinion, will better prepare our children for future

challenges and opportunities.

Thank you.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES A. BARCIA

Thank you Ranking Member Hall. I also wish to thank Chairman Boehlert for his

willingness to work with me in such a bipartisan manner to craft this portion of

the Manager’s Amendment.

My provision in this manager’s amendment incorporates much of H.R. 1889, the

Educational Technology Utilization Extension Assistance Act, a bill I introduced,

along with my colleagues David Wu and Mark Udall. This section directs the National Science Foundation to work with the Department of Education to create educational technology extension centers.

The focus on these centers is to advise and assist local K–12 schools to better utilize and integrate their existing educational technology infrastructure into their curriculum and classroom, as well as help schools evaluate their need for new information technologies.

This provision addresses a problem identified by school administrators, independent educational organizations and scores of teachers, that more support resources are needed to maximize the use of technology in the classroom.

184

Education technology centers will enhance the services provided by those who are

currently providing assistance to teachers, like local intermediate school districts.

Where this type of technical advice is not available, this legislation would initiate

this important effort.

Mr. Chairman, there simply are not enough hours in the day for our teachers to

meet the demands placed on them in the classroom and to take the time needed

to research all of the new technologies available for their students.

I believe by establishing centers dedicated solely to provide teachers with information and training to effectively utilize available technology, we will allow teachers

to provide their students with the resources necessary to equip them for the 21st

century.

I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this manager’s amendment.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and Ranking Member Ralph Hall for

this opportunity to markup, H.R. 1858, which would make improvements in mathematics and science education in our nation, and H.R. 100, the National Science and

Education Act. These bills are long overdue and are much needed in ensuring that

we have adequate numbers of trained scientists and mathematicians for the technological and economic challenges of tomorrow.

H.R. 1858 offers support to current teachers and help to recruit and retain new

teachers who are trained and accredited to teach math and science.

In order to accomplish the goals of this legislation it would create new approaches

for the Nations Science Foundation (NSF) to take in building a stronger and more

diverse repository of mathematics and science trained teachers. The long range goal

is to provide instruction in math and science by teachers who are trained in those

areas, and through this effort increase the number of students who pursue math

and science undergraduate and graduate degrees.

It is my goal along with the committee’s to create a public education system that

would develop a technologically capable workforce that can compete in the global

economy.

Toward this end, I have offered several amendments to H.R. 1858. The first

amendment directs that the National Digital Library contain information about

electronic links to materials that educators may access. The second amendment requires that research center awards focus on research and development of educational practices designed to improve the academic performance of a broad range

of students including those from underrepresented groups.

Through the committee hearing process on these particular bills the groups that

are underrepresented have been identified as African Americans, Hispanics, Native

Americans and women.

The last amendment directs that the NSF provide information on the awarding

of Robert Noyce Scholarships. As a result of this amendment the NSF will be required to collect relevant statistically and demographic data on scholarship recipients and information on the locations at which scholarship recipients carry out their

teaching requirement. This report is required by year 7 of the program assessing

its impact on drawing math and science students into teaching careers, including

students from underrepresented groups.

I thank the Chair and committee members for their consideration of these amendments and look forward to their inclusion in the final bill sent to the House by this

committee.

Thank you.

The first amendment on the roster is the Manager’s Amendment,

offered by the Ranking Minority Member, Mr. Hall and myself. I

ask unanimous consent that the Manager’s Amendment be considered En Bloc. Without objection, so ordered. Clerk will report the

amendment.

Ms. CLERK. En Block amendments to H.R. 1858, offered by Mr.

Boehlert and Mr. Hall.

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

Chairman BOEHLERT. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize myself for a

couple of minutes to explain the Amendment. This Amendment,

which I am offering with Mr. Hall, reflects a negotiated bipartisan

agreement. Let me stress. It reflects a negotiated bipartisan agreement. It includes versions of proposals initially made by Mr. Akin,

Mrs. Morella, Mr. Honda, Mr. Matheson, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr.

Larson and Mr. Barcia, as well as some technical changes. Similarly, by the way, the Manager’s Amendment at Subcommittee included version of proposals by Mr. Smith of Michigan, Ms. Johnson

of Texas and Mr. Hall. I think the sponsors of the various amendments will explain their portions of it, so I won’t belabor those

items now.

Let me just say that I appreciate the willingness of the minority

to negotiate the content of the amendments. And I think the bill

is stronger for those provisions being added. The amendments are

consistent with the philosophy and structure of the underlying bill

and will ensure that all students will benefit from having better

teachers and from having and making better use of information

technology, thanks to these amendments.

I now recognize Mr. Hall to offer his comments on the bipartisan

amendment.

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am pleased to join you in

offering this bipartisan amendment to the Markup vehicle for H.R.

1858. The amendment, I might point out, also, includes several

new provisions advanced by Mr. Honda, Mr. Matheson and Mrs.

Jackson Lee, but I will defer to them, as you have done, for their

explanation of their provisions. I want to thank you for working

with us in this manner. And I urge your colleagues to support the

Manager’s Amendment. I yield back my time.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Is there any further discussion? If no, the

vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor——

Ms. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman—Mr. Chairman?

Chairman BOEHLERT. All right. Ms. Morella?

Ms. MORELLA. I would love to have an opportunity to thank you

and Ranking Member Hall for moving in such a bipartisan manner

this important bill.

[Statement of Constance A. Morella:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CONSTANCE A. MORELLA

Mr. Chairman, I want to personally thank you for pushing this legislation and

holding this markup. The future of our educational enterprise is of paramount importance to our continued prosperity. I don’t believe that it is an exaggeration to

suggest that today’s effort will be among the most important work this committee

does this session.

Members of this committee are keenly aware of our nation’s lackluster performance in the most recent TIMSS, TIMSS–R, and NAEP reports. Perhaps most disturbing, data from the fourth through twelfth grades suggest that our students grow

further behind our international counterparts the longer they are in school. In many

cases, even our strongest districts lag behind international averages. For example,

while I took some pride in learning that Montgomery County soundly beat the national average in both math and science, we still lagged Eastern and European

powerhouses. This situation is quite simply unacceptable.

H.R. 1858 and H.R. 100 do a number of things to address these problems. We

need to recruit better teachers and provide additional training to the ones we have.

Teachers, like most professionals in opportunities for continuous development. Education is not a static discipline; our needs and therefore the requirements of our

teachers are constantly changing as technology advances. Our methodologies need

to change with them. These bills will provide grants for the development of current

200

teachers, scholarships for math and science majors who go into teaching, funds to

provide master teachers, and other initiatives to improve the quality of our math

and science instructors.

In addition, we need to provide opportunities for traditionally underrepresented

groups to excel in math and science related fields. Bureau of Labor Statistics tell

us that careers in science, engineering, and technology are booming and over the

next few years we will need to fill over 5 million new jobs in high-tech specialty

occupations. To meet this demand, we will need participation from all sectors of our

workforce. Yet, according to a report by the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development, women, minorities, and persons with disabilities still eschew technical occupations. They are severely underrepresented in scientific disciplines and while they

represent the fastest growing segment of the workforce, they are not going into technical careers at an appreciable rate. If we are to meet the future demand for a highly skilled workforce, we must find ways to tap into these groups.

These bills would also address this important issue. They contain programs and

language specifically geared towards the recruitment and retention of qualified individuals from these underrepresented groups. I am thrilled that these proposals have

been included in this legislation and I thank the Chairman and the Committee for

prioritizing the need to strengthen the technology pipeline. Both bills that we are

considering today will make great strides in accomplishing this goal.

Ms. MORELLA. As the most recent TIMSS and TIMSS–R and

NAEP reports have shown, the quality of the U.S. science and

math education continues to lack the results that we expect from

American students. Fresh ideas and new approaches are desperately needed. By working together under your leadership, we

are able to implement some important reforms.

H.R. 1858 addresses many of the concerns outlined in the Glenn

Commission Report entitled, Before It’s Too Late. Particularly with

regard to teacher preparation. I served on that Glenn Commission.

We explored ways for teachers to access professional development

programs, to meet the ever-growing needs of our students and our

S.E.T. work force. And this bill will establish ways to recruit more

science and math professionals into the classroom and to make

sure our children’s instructors are trained in the specific subject

areas they will be teaching, while improving teacher incentives.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and the Committee staff, for

working with me to include my amendment in Section 706E,

Learning Community Consortium. This grant was developed from

recommendations of the Commission on the Advancement of

Women, Minorities and Individuals with Disabilities in science, engineering and technology and will enable a consortium of community colleges to establish a pilot project. The report reflects the important role of community colleges in preparing the high-tech employees of the future. When we look at nearly 45 percent of all U.S.

undergraduates currently enrolled in community colleges, a majority of whom came from traditionally underrepresented groups in

the science, engineering and technology fields—I recall Eileen Collins, even, was a product of community colleges.

As we recognize that diversity in science and math, it is necessary for our future success that these institutions not be left out.

Unfortunately, in a competitive world of merit review, these institutions generally are left behind, funds tend to gravitate toward

traditional programs and traditional ideas. But our efforts need to

be all encompassing and reflect a true diversity of students.

Community colleges generally have strong local ties and a proven

history of providing a qualified local work force in communities

around the nation and fostering the types of partnerships sought

after in this legislation.

201

So Mr. Chairman, I’m enthusiastically supporting this legislation. I want to thank you, Ranking Member Hall, the Committee,

the Staff, for prioritizing the need to strengthen the technology

pipeline.

Both bills that we are going to be looking at today are accomplishing that goal and will make great strides. Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I yield back.

Chariman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much, Mrs. Morella. And

thank you for the role you have played in your important Subcommittee and you are always there and we appreciate it.

And another one that we appreciate her valuable input is Ms.

Woolsey, who was particularly helpful at the Subcommittee level.

The Chair now recognizes the distinguished colleague from California.

[Statement of Lynn C. Woolsey follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. LYNN WOOLSEY

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time to speak in support of H.R. 1858. And, I’d

like to commend you for your efforts in bringing this bill together in a true bipartisan manner. That’s the mark of a legislative success and a reason why it’s such

a pleasure to serve on the Science Committee.

This bill can also be considered a success because it’s a strong blueprint to further

science education in our country. As a member of both the House Education and

Science Committees, I’m quite aware of the challenges that our students and schools

face in this area. We also know that having a properly educated workforce in the

math and science fields is a major priority of employers across the country, especially in the hi-tech arena.

Mr. Chairman, it’s also quite clear that there is no way that America can truly

have a technically competent workforce if the majority of our students—females—

don’t study science, math, engineering, or technology. That’s why I’m glad that we

were able to work together to ensure that this bill addresses this important issue.

The ‘‘Science Enrichment Programs for Girls,’’ which is based on my bill—H.R.

1636 and on H.R. 1693—will authorize N.S.F. to fund programs in elementary and

secondary schools that encourage the ongoing interest of girls in science, math, engineering, and technology. It will provide a way for girls to gain both the practical

advice and the vision they need to pursue undergraduate, graduate or careers in

these fields.

In turn, this will help create a bold new workforce of energized young women.

This means that companies will be able to hire the workers they need right here

in America, because, the fifty percent of our population which is now turning away

from careers in science, math, engineering and technology, will get the education

they need to fill those jobs.

This important provision is one reason I encourage my colleagues, on both sides

of the aisle, to join me in supporting this bill.

Thank you. I yield back my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you. I, too,

want to support H.R. 1858. And I want to compliment you on your

efforts at bringing this bill together in a truly bipartisan manner.

That is why I like serving on this Committee so very much. We actually get things done.

This bill can be considered a success because it is a strong,

strong blueprint to further scientific education in our country. And

as a member of both the House Education and Science Committees,

as is Congressman Ehlers, we are very aware of the challenges

that our students and schools face in this area of science, math and

technology. We also know that having a properly educated workforce in these fields is a major priority of employers across the

country. Especially in the high-tech arena.

Mr. Chairman, it is also quite clear that there is no way that

America can truly have a technically competent work force if the

202

majority of our students, females, don’t study science, math, engineering and technology. That is why I am glad that we are able

to work together to ensure that this bill addresses this important

issue.

The Science Enrichment Programs for girls, which is based on

my bill, H.R. 1636, and was also in Mr. Hall’s bill, H.R. 1693, will

authorize National Science Foundation to fund programs in elementary and secondary schools that encourage the ongoing interests of girls in science, math and technology. It will provide a way

for girls to gain both the practical advice and the vision they need

to pursue undergraduate, graduate or careers in these fields.

In turn, this will help create a bold new work force of energized

young women. Which means that companies will be able to hire the

workers they need right here in America because the 50 percent of

our population which is now turning away from careers in these

fields, will get the education they need so that they can, if they

choose, fill these jobs.

This important provision is one reason I encourage my colleagues

on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the bill. But

there are many, many other reasons, as well. Thank you.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much. Anyone else who

seeks recognition?

Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, this is on the Amendment. Is that

correct?

Chariman BOEHLERT. That is correct. The Manager’s Amendment. Mr. Barcia.

[Statement of James A. Barcia follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM BARCIA

Thank you Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Hall. I also wish to thank

Chairman Boehlert for his willingness to work with me in such a bipartisan manner

to craft this portion of the Manager’s Amendment.

My provision in this manager’s amendment incorporates much of H.R. 1889, the

Educational Technology Utilization Extension Assistance Act, a bill I introduced,

along with my colleagues David Wu and Mark Udall. This section directs the National Science Foundation to work with the Department of Education to create educational technology extension centers.

The focus of these centers is to advise and assist local K–12 schools to better utilize and integrate their existing educational technology infrastructure into their curriculum and classroom, as well as help schools evaluate their need for new information technologies.

This provision addresses a problem identified by school administrators, independent educational organizations and scores of teachers, that more support resources are needed to maximize the use of technology in the classroom.

Education technology centers will enhance the services provided by those who are

currently providing assistance to teachers, like local intermediate school districts.

Where this type of technical advice is not available, this legislation would initiate

this important effort.

Mr. Chairman, there simply are not enough hours in the day for our teachers to

meet the demands placed on them in the classroom and to take the time needed

to research all of the new technologies available for their students.

I believe by establishing centers dedicated solely to providing teachers with information and training to effectively utilize available technology, we will allow teachers

to provide their students with the resources necessary to equip them for the 21st

century.

I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this manager’s amendment.

Mr. BARCIA. Thank you, Chairman Boehlert. I also want to, first

of all, thank you for working together with Congressman Ehlers

and also Ranking Member Hall. I thank you for your willingness

203

to work together in a bipartisan manner to craft this portion of the

Manager’s Amendment.

My provision in this Manager’s Amendment incorporates much of

H.R. 1889, the Educational Technology, Utilization Extension Assistance Act, a bill I introduced along with my colleagues, David

Wu and Mark Udall. This section directs the National Science

Foundation to work with the Department of Education to create

educational technology extension centers.

The focus of these centers is to advise and assist local K–12

schools to better utilize and integrate their existing educational

technology infrastructure into their curriculum and classroom. As

well as help schools evaluate their need for new information technologies.

This provision also addressed a problem identified by school administrators, independent educational organizations and scores of

teachers that more support resources are needed to maximize the

use of technology in the classroom.

Education technology centers will enhance the services provided

by those who are currently providing assistance to teachers, like

local intermediate school districts. Where this type of technical advice is not available, this legislation would initiate this important

effort.

Mr. Chairman, there simply are not enough hours in the day for

our teachers to meet the demands placed on them in the classroom

and to take the time needed to research all of the new technologies

available for their students.

I believe by establishing centers dedicated solely to providing

teachers with information and training to effectively utilize available technology, we will allow teachers to provide their students

with the resources necessary to equip them for the 21st Century.

And I would urge my colleagues to support the adoption of the

Manager’s Amendment.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much. Chair recognizes

Mr. Larson.

[Statement of John B. Larson follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN B. LARSON

Thank you Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee.

The United States currently finds itself at the apogee of its wealth, power and

influence—a fact that is attributable, in no small part, to unprecedented innovation

in the information technology industry. As the former Chairman of the Science Committee, the Gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Sensenbrenner, has stated in the past,

‘‘maintaining the Nation’s global leadership in information technology will require

keeping open the pipeline of new ideas, technologies, and innovations * * * unless

we act soon to bolster the technological skills of our citizens, we risk losing our leadership.’’ As access to computers and the ability to use technology effectively are becoming

increasingly important for full participation in America’s economic, political and social life, it becomes necessary to become ever-more technologically fluent to stay

competitive in a globalized, and increasingly digital world.

My part of the Manager’s amendment is simple: it allows the National Science

Foundation to—as Dr. George Strawn of the NSF, who testified before the Science

Committee last year—‘‘[identify the] best educational practices to provide educators

and policy makers with tools for using existing and evolving Internet technology

more effectively as a part of [the nation’s] educational strategy.’’

My amendment simply adds a new section to Title VII requiring the National

Science Foundation to conduct a study—with—subsequent yearly updates—that

identifies:

(1) The current status of high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access to all public

elementary and secondary schools and libraries in the United States;

204

(2) How high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access to the Internet to such

schools and libraries can be MOST effectively utilized within each school and library; and

(3) The effect that specific or regional circumstances may have on these institutions’ ability to acquire high-speed, large bandwidth capacity access to achieve universal connectivity, which has become a crucial tool in the education process.

It is essential that in order to prepare our public schools for the 21st century, we

must rethink how our children’s education is delivered into the classrooms. This

amendment would provide our schools with the best data available from the some

of the nation’s top researchers to help schools enter the 21st century by establishing

the educational pipeline—clearly, broadband—though which we can supply the energy necessary to fuel the new digital economy.

Last year, I offered a similar amendment to H.R. 2086 that was adopted by the

House. Unfortunately, H.R. 2086 did not move in the Senate and, therefore, efforts

to review the impact of broadband technologies in instructional settings have languished. I believe it is imperative that we not forgo again the opportunity to study

how we can best provide our students these critical tools for learning in the 21st

century.

Lastly, I want to thank the Chairman, Mr. Boehlert, Mr. Ehlers, Mr. Hall and

the rest of the Members of the Committee for their hard work and cooperation in

bringing together their ideas into this common-sense bill which, I believe, will go

a long way towards accomplishing our Nation’s goals of maintaining our leading status in the world.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LARSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me join

in the accolades for the outstanding job you have done in bringing

these amendments forward. I would also like to thank Ranking

Member Hall and Eddie Bernice Johnson and Mr. Smith and Mr.

Ehlers, as well, for their cooperation in truly putting forward a bill

that will go a long way towards addressing a number of the concerns the members have on this Committee as it relates to science

and mathematics teaching within our public school system.

Also, thank you for including an amendment that I have offered

that addresses a very specific issue of broad bandwidth and the

ability for our school systems to overcome some of the problems

that create the inequities between urban, suburban and rural

schools and their connectivity. I thank you again for your leadership and appreciate the opportunity to have participated in

this——

Chairman BOEHLERT. Let me point out that we have a reporting

quorum here, so I would hope my colleagues would keep their remarks brief. And furthermore, let me say, in response to Mr. Barcia, it is not a willingness of the Chair to work on a bipartisan

basis. It is an obligation. And I take that obligation seriously. Mr.

Udall.

[Statement of Mark Udall follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL

I want to express particular support for Title IV in this bill. Title IV sets up the

Robert Noyce Scholarship program, which would provide scholarships and programming designed to recruit and train mathematics and science teachers. As you know,

Mr. Chairman, I introduced a similar bill earlier this year, which was incorporated

into Mr. Hall’s Science Education for the 21st Century Act. I am very glad you’ve

incorporated provisions dealing with scholarships in this package.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. I’d like to recognize my colleagues

for their good work in putting together this manager’s amendment, and I’d like to

recognize you for working with them to include this amendment in your bill. Given

its bipartisan support, I am hopeful we’ll be able to move this bill quickly through

this Committee and through the Congress and to the President for his signature.

Mr. UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, want to join my

colleagues in thanking the leadership of the Committee under your

205

able leadership and Ranking Member Hall for bringing this important legislation forward.

In particular, the—I want to express my support for Title IV.

Title IV sets up the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program, which

would provide scholarships and programming designed to recruit

and train mathematics and science teachers. As you know, Mr.

Chairman, I introduced a similar bill earlier this year, which was

incorporated into Mr. Hall’s Science Education for the 21st Century

Act. I am very glad you have incorporated provisions dealing with

scholarships in this package. Again, thank you, and I yield back my

time.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Mr. Smith.

[Statement of Nick Smith follows:]

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. NICK SMITH

Last week the Subcommittee on Research had the opportunity to markup the two

pieces of legislation we’ll consider today. I’m pleased to report that we reached broad

bipartisan agreement on the substance of the bills and were able to report them

unanimously to Full Committee. In opening that markup I noted that both bills address an issue that is at the heart of our national security and prosperity: the math

and science education we provide our children. We’re in the midst of a technological

revolution that has driven our economy, improved our productivity, and helped us

live longer, healthier lives—a revolution fueled in large part by our past investment

in research and development. But this research and development is, in turn, enabled by the investments we make educating our children in math and science. The

two bills we reported take important steps to manage that investment.

I’m also pleased that the bills before us today represent the work and input of

many Members from both sides of the Research Subcommittee and the Full Committee. I want to thank the Chairman for his willingness to include provisions important to me and the other Members of the Subcommittee in his bill, H.R. 1858,

and particularly for his inclusion of language establishing the Centers on Research

on Learning and Education and Education Research Teacher Fellowships that comprise Title III that originally appeared in my Education Research legislation. These

provisions address the need to bridge the gap between the basic research on how

children learn and actual classroom practice—a gap we’ve explored in several hearings before the Subcommittee. As some of the witnesses at those hearings testified,

the ‘‘fire’’ of interest within children for math and science is likely lit at a young

age. We need to do what we can to encourage this ‘‘fire starting’’ in more classrooms

nationwide.

I’m pleased to offer my support to the bills today and once again thank Chairman

Boehlert and Ranking Member Hall, as well as the Ranking Member of the Research Subcommittee, Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson, and Rep. Vern Ehlers, the sponsor of H.R. 100, for bringing the bills this far.

Mr. SMITH. I hope all further comments can be limited to 60 seconds and I will try to do that. These bills passed our Subcommittee

last week. I said at that time that probably math and science education is the great—is the second greatest threat to national security of this country. Not only in developing greater independence in

energy, but energy that defense technology, the economy, in general, and improving our productivity and developing new products.

These two bills are going to move us ahead with hopefully, the

beginning of a greater determination to improve math and science

education in K through 12. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman BOEHLERT. As Mark Negronsky used to say, you have

had the last word. And it is a good word. And I thank you very

much for the leadership you have demonstrated. We have a call to

the House right now. So I would like to proceed, if there are no

strenuous objections. Is there any further discussion? If no, the

vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say aye. Opposed, No.

206

The ayes have it. The amendment is agreed to. Now, there will be

a motion to report the—are there any further amendments? Hearing none, the question is on the bill H.R. 1858, National Mathematics and Science Partnership Act, as amended. All those in

favor, say aye. Opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes

have it. I will now recognize Mr. Gordon for a motion.

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I move the Committee favorably report H.R. 1858 as amended to House with the recommendation

that the bill, as amended, do pass.

Furthermore, I move that the staff be instructed to prepare the

legislative report and make necessary technical and conforming

changes, that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the

bill before the House for consideration.

Chairman BOEHLERT. The Chair notes the presence of a reporting quorum. The question is now on the motion to report the bill

favorably. Those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye.

Opposed, no. The ayes have it. I move that Members have 2 subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental, minority or

additional views on the measure. I move pursuant to Cause one of

Rule 22 of the Rules of the House that the Committee authorized

the Chairman to offer such motions as may be necessary in the

House to go to conference with the Senate on the bill H.R. 1858 or

a similar Senate bill.

Æ