Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related Trends
Published: 2005-10-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The United States has long been known as a world leader in scientific and technological innovation. To help maintain this advantage, the federal government has spent billions of dollars on education programs in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields for many years. However, concerns have been raised about the nation's ability to maintain its global technological competitive advantage in the future. This report presents information on (1) the number of federal programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were designed to increase the number of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or improve educational programs in STEM fields, and what agencies report about their effectiveness; (2) how the numbers, percentages, and characteristics of students, graduates, and employees in STEM fields have changed over the years; and (3) factors cited by educators and others as affecting students' decisions about pursing STEM degrees and occupations, and suggestions that have been made to encourage more participation. GAO received written and/or technical comments from several agencies. While one agency, the National Science Foundation, raised several questions about the findings, the others generally agreed with the findings and conclusion and several agencies commended GAO for this work.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies reported spending about $2.8 billion in fiscal year 2004 for 207 education programs designed to increase the numbers of students and graduates or improve educational programs in STEM fields, but agencies reported little about their effectiveness. The National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation had most of the programs and spent most of the funds. Officials also reported that evaluations were completed or under way for about half of the programs. While the total numbers of students, graduates, and employees in STEM fields increased, changes in the numbers and percentages of women, minorities, and international students varied during the periods reviewed. From academic year 1995-1996 to 2003-2004, the percentage of students in STEM fields increased from 21 to 23 percent. Changes in the percentages of domestic minority students varied by group. From academic year 1994-1995 to 2002-2003, the number of graduates in STEM fields increased 8 percent, but this was less than the 30 percent increase in graduates in non-STEM fields. International graduates continued to earn about one-third or more of the advanced degrees in three STEM fields. Between calendar years 1994 and 2003, employment in STEM fields increased 23 percent compared to 17 percent in non-STEM fields, and there was no statistically significant change in the percentage of women employees. Educators and others cited several factors that affected students' decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and made suggestions to encourage more participation. They said teacher quality at the kindergarten to 12th grades, the mathematics and science courses completed in high school, and a mentor, especially for women and minorities, influenced domestic students' decisions. Also, these sources said that opportunities outside the United States and the visa process affected international students' decisions. To encourage more participation in STEM fields, educators and others made several suggestions. But before adopting any of them, it is important to know the extent to which existing STEM education programs are appropriately targeted and making the best use of available federal resources.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The United States has long been known as a world leader in scientific and  technological innovation. To help maintain this advantage, the federal  government has spent billions of dollars on education programs in the  science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields for many  years. Some of these programs were designed to increase the numbers of  women and minorities pursuing degrees in STEM fields. In addition, for  many years, thousands of international students came to the United States  to study and work in STEM fields. However, concerns have been raised  about the nation’s ability to maintain its global technological competitive  advantage in the future. In spite of the billions of dollars spent to  encourage students and graduates to pursue studies in STEM fields or  improve STEM educational programs, the percentage of United States  students earning bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields has been relatively  constant—about a third of bachelor’s degrees—since 1977. Furthermore,  after the events of September 11, 2001, the United States established  several new systems and processes to help enhance border security. In  some cases, implementation of these new systems and processes, which  established requirements for several federal agencies, higher education  institutions, and potential students, made it more difficult for international  students to enter this country to study and work.
In the last few years, many reports and news articles have been published,  and several bills have been introduced in Congress that address issues  related to STEM education and occupations. This report presents  information on (1) the number of federal civilian education programs  funded in fiscal year 2004 that were designed to increase the numbers of  students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or  improve educational programs in STEM fields and what agencies report  about their effectiveness; (2) how the numbers, percentages, and  characteristics of students, graduates, and employees in STEM fields have  changed over the years; and (3) factors cited by educators and others as  influencing people’s decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and  occupations, and suggestions that have been made to encourage greater  participation in STEM fields. To determine the number of programs  designed to increase the numbers of students and graduates pursuing  STEM degrees and occupations, we identified 15 federal departments and  agencies as having STEM programs, and we developed and conducted a  survey asking each department or agency to provide information on its  education programs, including information about their effectiveness. We  received responses from 14 of them, the Department of Defense did not  participate, and we determined that at least 13 agencies had STEM  education programs during fiscal year 2004 that met our criteria.
To describe how the numbers of students, graduates, and employees in  STEM fields have changed, we analyzed and reported data from the  Department of Education’s (Education) National Center for Education  Statistics (NCES) and the Department of Labor’s (Labor) Bureau of Labor  Statistics (BLS). Specifically, as shown in table 1, we used the National  Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and the Integrated  Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) from NCES and the  Current Population Survey (CPS) data from BLS. We assessed the data for  reliability and reasonableness and found them to be sufficiently reliable  for the purposes of this report.
To obtain perspectives on the factors that influence people’s decisions  about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and to obtain suggestions  for encouraging greater participation in STEM fields, we interviewed  educators and administrators in eight colleges and universities (the  University of California Los Angeles and the University of Southern  California in California; Clark Atlanta University, Georgia Institute of  Technology, and Spelman College in Georgia; the University of Illinois;  Purdue University in Indiana; and Pennsylvania State University). We  selected these colleges and universities to include a mix of public and  private institutions, provide geographic diversity, and include a few  minority-serving institutions, including one (Spelman College) that serves  only women students. In addition, most of the institutions had large total  numbers of students, including international students, enrolled in STEM  fields. We also asked officials from the eight universities to identify  current students to whom we could send an e-mail survey. We received  responses from 31 students from five of these institutions. In addition, we  interviewed federal agency officials and representatives from associations  and education organizations, and analyzed reports on various topics  related to STEM education and occupations. Appendix I contains a more  detailed discussion of our scope and methodology. We conducted our  work between October 2004 and October 2005 in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: STEM includes many fields of study and occupations. Based on the  National Science Foundations’ categorization of STEM fields, we  developed STEM fields of study from NCES’s National Postsecondary  Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data  System (IPEDS), and identified occupations from BLS’s Current  Population Survey (CPS). Using these data sources, we developed nine  STEM fields for students, eight STEM fields for graduates, and four broad  STEM fields for occupations. Table 2 lists these STEM fields and  occupations and examples of subfields. Additional information on STEM  occupations is provided in appendix I.
Many of the STEM fields require completion of advanced courses in  mathematics or science, subjects that are introduced and developed at the  kindergarten through 12th grade level, and the federal government has  taken steps to help improve achievement in these and other subjects.  Enacted in 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) seeks to improve  the academic achievement of all of the nation’s school-aged children.  NCLBA requires that states develop and implement academic content and  achievement standards in mathematics, science and the reading or  language arts. All students are required to participate in statewide  assessments during their elementary and secondary school years.  Improving teacher quality is another goal of NCLBA as a strategy to raise  student academic achievement. Specifically, all teachers teaching core  academic subjects must be highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006  school year. NCLBA generally defines highly qualified teachers as those  that have (1) a bachelor’s degree, (2) state certification, and (3) subject  area knowledge for each academic subject they teach.
The federal government also plays a role in coordinating federal science  and technology issues. The National Science and Technology Council  (NSTC) was established in 1993 and is the principal means for the  Administration to coordinate science and technology among the diverse  parts of the federal research and development areas. One objective of  NSTC is to establish clear national goals for federal science and  technology investments in areas ranging from information technologies  and health research to improving transportation systems and  strengthening fundamental research. NSTC is responsible for preparing  research and development strategies that are coordinated across federal  agencies in order to accomplish these multiple national goals.
In addition, the federal government, universities and colleges, and others  have developed programs to provide opportunities for all students to  pursue STEM education and occupations. Additional steps have been  taken to increase the numbers of women, minorities, and students with  disadvantaged backgrounds in the STEM fields, such as providing  additional academic and research opportunities. According to the 2000  Census, 52 percent of the total U.S. population 18 and over were women;  in 2003, members of racial or ethnic groups constituted from 0.5 percent to  12.6 percent of the civilian labor force (CLF), as shown in table 3.
In addition to domestic students, international students have pursued  STEM degrees and worked in STEM occupations in the United States. To  do so, international students and scholars must obtain visas. International  students who wish to study in the United States must first apply to a  Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) certified  school. In order to enroll students from other nations, U.S. colleges and  universities must be certified by the Student and Exchange Visitor  Program within the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and  Customs Enforcement organization. As of February 2004, nearly 9,000  technical schools and colleges and universities had been certified. SEVIS,  is an Internet-based system that maintains data on international students  and exchange visitors before and during their stay in the United States.  Upon admitting a student, the school enters the student’s name and other  information into the SEVIS database. At this time the student may apply  for a student visa. In some cases, a Security Advisory Opinion (SAO) from  the Department of State (State) may be needed to determine whether or  not to issue a visa to the student. SAOs are required for a number of  reasons, including concerns that a visa applicant may engage in the illegal  transfer of sensitive technology. An SAO based on technology transfer  concerns is known as Visas Mantis and, according to State officials, is the  most common type of SAO applied to science applicants. In April 2004,  the Congressional Research Service reported that State maintains a  technology alert list that includes 16 sensitive areas of study. The list was  produced in an effort to help the United States prevent the illegal transfer  of controlled technology and includes chemical and biotechnology  engineering, missile technology, nuclear technology, robotics, and  advanced computer technology.
Many foreign workers enter the United States annually through the H-1B  visa program, which assists U.S. employers in temporarily filling specialty  occupations. Employed workers may stay in the United States on an H-1B  visa for up to 6 years. The current cap on the number of H-1B visas that  can be granted is 65,000. The law exempts certain workers, however, from  this cap, including those who are employed or have accepted employment  in specified positions. Moreover, up to 20,000 exemptions are allowed for  those holding a master’s degree or higher.
section_title: More than 200 Federal Education Programs Are Designed to Increase the Numbers of Students and Graduates or Improve Educational Programs in STEM Fields, but Most Have Not Been Evaluated
paragraphs: Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies reported having 207 education  programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were specifically established to  increase the numbers of students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees  and occupations, or improve educational programs in STEM fields, but  they reported little about the effectiveness of these programs. These 13  federal agencies reported spending about $2.8 billion for their STEM  education programs. Taken together, NIH and NSF sponsored nearly half  of the programs and spent about 71 percent of the funds. In addition,  agencies reported that most of the programs had multiple goals, and many  were targeted to multiple groups. Although evaluations have been done or  were under way for about half of the programs, little is known about the  extent to which most STEM programs are achieving their desired results.  Coordination among the federal STEM education programs has been  limited. However, in 2003, the National Science and Technology Council  formed a subcommittee to address STEM education and workforce policy  issues across federal agencies.
subsections: section_title: Federal Civilian Agencies Reported Sponsoring over 200 STEM Education Programs and Spending Billions in Fiscal Year 2004
paragraphs: Officials from 13 federal civilian agencies provided information on 207  STEM education programs funded in fiscal year 2004. The numbers of  programs ranged from 51 to 1 per agency with two agencies, NIH and NSF,  sponsoring nearly half of the programs—99 of 207. Table 4 provides a  summary of the numbers of programs by agency, and appendix II contains  a list of the 207 STEM education programs and funding levels for fiscal  year 2004 by agency.
Federal civilian agencies reported that approximately $2.8 billion was  spent on STEM education programs in fiscal year 2004. The funding levels  for STEM education programs among the agencies ranged from about $998  million to about $4.7 million. NIH and NSF accounted for about 71 percent  of the total—about $2 billion of the approximate $2.8 billion. NIH spent  about $998 million in fiscal year 2004, about 3.6 percent of its $28 billion  appropriation, and NSF spent about $997 million, which represented 18  percent of its appropriation. Four other agencies, some with a few  programs, spent about 23 percent of the total: $636 million. For example,  the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) spent about  $231 million on 5 programs and the Department of Education (Education)  spent about $221 million on 4 programs during fiscal year 2004. Figure 1  shows the 6 federal civilian agencies that used the most funds for STEM  education programs and the funds used by the remaining 7 agencies.
The funding reported for individual STEM education programs varied  significantly, and many of the programs have been funded for more than  10 years. The funding ranged from $4,000 for an USDA-sponsored program  that offered scholarships to U.S. citizens seeking bachelor’s degrees at  Hispanic-serving institutions, to about $547 million for a NIH grant  program that is designed to develop and enhance research training  opportunities for individuals in biomedical, behavioral, and clinical  research by supporting training programs at institutions of higher  education. As shown in table 5, most programs were funded at $5 million  or less and 13 programs were funded at more than $50 million in fiscal  year 2004. About half of the STEM education programs were first funded  after 1998. The oldest program began in 1936, and 72 programs are over 10  years old. Appendix III describes the STEM education programs that  received funding of $10 million or more during fiscal year 2004 or 2005.
section_title: Federal Agencies Reported Most STEM Programs Had Multiple Goals and Were Targeted to Multiple Groups
paragraphs: Agencies reported that most of the STEM education programs had  multiple goals. Survey respondents reported that 80 percent (165 of 207) of  the education programs had multiple goals, with about half of these  identifying four or more goals for individual programs. Moreover,  according to the survey responders, few programs had a single goal. For  example, 2 programs were identified as having one goal of attracting and  preparing students at any education level to pursue coursework in the  STEM areas, while 112 programs identified this as one of multiple goals.  Table 6 shows the program goals and numbers of STEM programs aligned  with them.
The STEM education programs provided financial assistance to students,  educators, and institutions. According to the survey responses, 131  programs provided financial support for students or scholars, and 84  programs provided assistance for teacher and faculty development. Many  of the programs provided financial assistance to multiple beneficiaries, as  shown in table 7.
Most of the programs were not targeted to a specific group but aimed to  serve a wide range of students, educators, and institutions. Of the 207  programs, 54 were targeted to 1 group and 151 had multiple target  groups. In addition, many programs were targeted to the same group. For  example, while 12 programs were aimed solely at graduate students, 88  other programs had graduate students as one of multiple target groups.  Fewer programs were targeted to elementary and secondary teachers and  kindergarten through 12th grade students than to other target groups.  Table 8 summarizes the numbers of STEM programs targeted to one group  and multiple groups.
Some programs limited participation to certain groups. According to  survey respondents, U.S. citizenship was required to be eligible for 53  programs, and an additional 75 programs were open only to U.S. citizens  or permanent residents. About one-fourth of the programs had no  citizenship requirement, and 24 programs allowed noncitizens or  permanent residents to participate in some cases. According to a NSF  official, students receiving scholarships or fellowships through NSF  programs must be U.S. citizens or permanent residents. In commenting on  a draft of this report, NSF reported that these restrictions are considered  to be an effective strategy to support its goal of creating a diverse,  competitive, and globally-engaged U.S. workforce of scientists, engineers,  technologists, and well-prepared citizens. Officials at two universities said  that some research programs are not open to non-citizens. Such  restrictions may reflect concerns about access to sensitive areas. In  addition to these restrictions, some programs are designed to increase  minority representation in STEM fields. For example, NSF sponsors a  program called Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences  to increase participation by African Americans, Hispanic Americans,  Native Americans (American Indians and Alaskan Natives), Native Pacific  Islanders (Polynesians or Micronesians), and persons with disabilities.
section_title: Agency Officials Reported That Evaluations Were Completed or Under Way for About Half of the Federal Programs
paragraphs: Evaluations had been completed or were under way for about half of the  STEM education programs. Agency officials responded that evaluations  were completed for 55 of the 207 programs and that for 49 programs,  evaluations were under way at the time we conducted our survey. Agency  officials provided us documentation for evaluations of 43 programs, and  most of the completed evaluations reviewed reported that the programs  met their objectives or goals. For example, a March 2004 report on the  outcomes and impacts of NSF’s Minority Postdoctoral Research  Fellowships program concluded that there was strong qualitative and  quantitative evidence that this program is meeting its broad goal of  preparing scientists from those ethnic groups that are significantly  underrepresented in tenured U.S. science and engineering professorships  and for positions of leadership in industry and government.
However, evaluations had not been done for 103 programs, some of which  have been operating for many years. Of these, it may have been too soon  to expect evaluations for about 32 programs that were initially funded in  fiscal year 2002 or later. However, of the remaining 71 programs, 17 have  been operating for over 15 years and have not been evaluated. In  commenting on a draft of this report NSF noted that all of its programs  undergo evaluation and that it uses a variety of mechanisms for program  evaluation. We reported in 2003 that several agencies used various  strategies to develop and improve evaluations. Evaluations play an  important role in improving program operations and ensuring an efficient  use of federal resources. Although some of the STEM education programs  are small in terms of their funding levels, evaluations can be designed to  consider the size of the program and the costs associated with measuring  outcomes and collecting data.
section_title: A Subcommittee Was Established in 2003 to Help Coordinate STEM Education Programs among Federal Agencies
paragraphs: Coordination of federal STEM education programs has been limited. In  January 2003 the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC),  Committee on Science (COS), established a subcommittee on education  and workforce development. The purpose of the subcommittee is to advise  and assist COS and NSTC on policies, procedures, and programs relating  to STEM education and workforce development. According to its charter,  the subcommittee will address education and workforce policy issues and  research and development efforts that focus on STEM education issues at  all levels, as well as current and projected STEM workforce needs, trends,  and issues. The members include representatives from 20 agencies and  offices—the 13 agencies that responded to our survey as well as the  Departments of Defense, State, and Justice, and the Office of Science and  Technology Policy, the Office of Management and Budget, the Domestic  Policy Council, and the National Economic Council. The subcommittee  has working groups on (1) human capacity in STEM areas, (2) minority  programs, (3) effective practices for assessing federal efforts, and (4)  issues affecting graduate and postdoctoral researchers. The Human  Capacity in STEM working group is focused on three strategic initiatives:  defining and assessing national STEM needs, including programs and  research projects; identifying and analyzing the available data regarding  the STEM workforce; and creating and implementing a comprehensive  national response that enhances STEM workforce development.
NSTC reported that as of June 2005 the subcommittee had a number of  accomplishments and projects under way that related to attracting  students to STEM fields. For example, it has (1) surveyed federal agency  education programs designed to increase the participation of women and  underrepresented minorities in STEM studies; (2) inventoried federal  fellowship programs for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows; and  (3) coordinated the Excellence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and  Mathematics Education Week activities, which provide an opportunity for  the nation’s schools to focus on improving mathematics and science  education. In addition, the subcommittee is developing a Web site for  federal educational resources in STEM fields and a set of principles that  agencies would use in setting levels of support for graduate and  postdoctoral fellowships and traineeships.
section_title: Numbers of Students, Graduates, and Employees in STEM Fields Generally Increased, but Percentage Changes Varied
paragraphs: While the total numbers of students, graduates, and employees have  increased in STEM fields, percentage changes for women, minorities, and  international students varied during the periods reviewed. The increase in  the percentage of students in STEM fields was greater than the increase in  non-STEM fields, but the change in percentage of graduates in STEM fields  was less than the percentage change in non-STEM fields. Moreover,  employment increased more in STEM fields than in non-STEM fields.  Further, changes in the percentages of minority students varied by race or  ethnic group, international graduates continued to earn about a third or  more of the advanced degrees in three STEM fields, and there was no  statistically significant change in the percentage of women employees.  Figure 2 summarizes key changes in the students, graduates, and  employees in STEM fields.
subsections: section_title: Numbers of Students in STEM Fields Grew, but This Increase Varied by Education Level and Student Characteristics
paragraphs: Total enrollments of students in STEM fields have increased, and the  percentage change was greater for STEM fields than non-STEM fields, but  the percentage of students in STEM fields remained about the same. From  the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, total  enrollments in STEM fields increased 21 percent—more than the 11  percent enrollment increase in non-STEM fields. The number of students  enrolled in STEM fields represented 23 percent of all students enrolled  during the 2003-2004 academic year, a modest increase from the 21  percent these students constituted in the 1995-1996 academic year. Table 9  summarizes the changes in overall enrollment across all education levels  from the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year.
The increase in the numbers of students in STEM fields is mostly a result  of increases at the bachelor’s and master’s levels. Of the total increase of  about 865,000 students in STEM fields, about 740,000 was due to the  increase in the numbers of students at the bachelor’s and master’s levels.  See table 23 in appendix IV for additional information on the estimated  numbers of students in STEM fields in academic years 1995-1996 and 2003- 2004.
The percentage of students in STEM fields who are women increased from  the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, and in the  2003-2004 academic year women students constituted at least 50 percent  of the students in 3 STEM fields—biological sciences, psychology, and  social sciences. However, in the 2003-2004 academic year, men students  continued to outnumber women students in STEM fields, and men  constituted an estimated 54 percent of the STEM students overall. In  addition, men constituted at least 76 percent of the students enrolled in  computer sciences, engineering, and technology. See tables 24 and 25 in  appendix IV for additional information on changes in the numbers and  percentages of women students in the STEM fields for academic years  1995-1996 and 2003-2004.
While the numbers of domestic minority students in STEM fields also  increased, changes in the percentages of minority students varied by racial  or ethnic group. For example, Hispanic students increased 33 percent,  from the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year. In  comparison, the number of African American students increased about 69  percent. African American students increased from 9 to 12 percent of all  students in STEM fields while Asian/Pacific Islander students continued to  constitute about 7 percent. Table 10 shows the numbers and percentages  of minority students in STEM fields for the 1995-1996 academic year and  the 2003-2004 academic year.
From the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, the  number of international students in STEM fields increased by about 57  percent solely because of an increase at the bachelor’s level. The numbers  of international students in STEM fields at the master’s and doctoral levels  declined, with the largest decline occurring at the doctoral level. Table 11  shows the numbers and percentage changes in international students from  the 1995-1996 academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year.
According to the Institute of International Education, from the 2002-2003  academic year to the 2003-2004 academic year, the number of international  students declined for the first time in over 30 years, and that was the  second such decline since the 1954-1955 academic year, when the institute  began collecting and reporting data on international students. Moreover,  in November 2004, the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) reported a 6  percent decline in first-time international graduate student enrollment  from 2003 to 2004. Following a decade of steady growth, CGS also  reported that the number of first-time international students studying in  the United States decreased between 6 percent and 10 percent for 3  consecutive years.
section_title: Total Numbers of Graduates with STEM Degrees Increased, but Numbers Decreased in Some Fields, and Percentages of Minority Graduates at the Master’s and Doctoral Levels Did Not Change
paragraphs: The number of graduates with degrees in STEM fields increased by 8  percent from the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year.  However, during this same period the number of graduates with degrees in  non-STEM fields increased by 30 percent. From academic year 1994-1995  to academic year 2002-2003, the percentage of graduates with STEM  degrees decreased from 32 percent to 28 percent of total graduates. Table  12 provides data on the changes in the numbers and percentages of  graduates in STEM and non-STEM fields.
Decreases in the numbers of graduates occurred in some STEM fields at  each education level, but particularly at the doctoral level. The numbers of  graduates with bachelor’s degrees decreased in four of eight STEM fields,  the numbers with master’s degrees decreased in five of eight fields, and  the numbers with doctoral degrees decreased in six of eight STEM fields.  At the doctoral level, these declines ranged from 14 percent in  mathematics/computer sciences to 74 percent in technology. Figure 3  shows the percentage change in graduates with degrees in STEM fields  from the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year.
From the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year, the  total number of women graduates increased in four of the eight fields, and  the percentages of women earning degrees in STEM fields increased in six  of the eight fields at all three educational levels. Conversely, the total  number of men graduates decreased, and the percentages of men  graduates declined in six of the eight fields at all three levels from the  1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year. However, men  continued to constitute over 50 percent of the graduates in five of eight  fields at all three education levels. Table 13 summarizes the numbers of  graduates by gender, level, and field. Table 26 in appendix IV provides  additional data on the percentages of men and women graduates by STEM  field and education level.
The total numbers of domestic minority graduates in STEM fields  increased, although the percentage of minority graduates with STEM  degrees at the master’s or doctoral level did not change from the 1994-1995  academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year. For example, while the  number of Native American graduates increased 37 percent, Native  American graduates remained less than 1 percent of all STEM graduates at  the master’s and doctoral levels. Table 14 shows the percentages and  numbers of domestic minority graduates for the 1994-1995 academic year  and the 2002-2003 academic year.
International students earned about one-third or more of the degrees at  both the master’s and doctoral levels in several fields in the 1994-1995 and  the 2002-2003 academic years. For example, in academic year 2002-2003,  international students earned between 45 percent and 57 percent of all  degrees in engineering and mathematics/computer sciences at the master’s  and doctoral levels. However, at each level there were changes in the  numbers and percentages of international graduates. At the master’s level,  the total number of international graduates increased by about 31 percent  from the 1994-1995 academic year to the 2002-2003 academic year; while  the number of graduates decreased in four of the fields and the  percentages of international graduates declined in three fields. At the  doctoral level, the total number of international graduates decreased by 12  percent, while the percentage of international graduates increased or  remained the same in all fields. Table 15 shows the numbers and  percentages of international graduates in STEM fields.
section_title: STEM Employment Rose, but the Percentage of Women Remained About the Same and Minorities Continued to be Underrepresented
paragraphs: While the total number of STEM employees increased, this increase varied  across STEM fields. Employment increased by 23 percent in STEM fields  as compared to 17 percent in non-STEM fields from calendar year 1994 to  calendar year 2003. Employment increased by 78 percent in the  mathematics/computer sciences field and by 20 percent in the science field  over this period. The changes in number of employees in the engineering  and technology fields were not statistically significant. Employment  estimates from 1994 to 2003 in the STEM fields are shown in figure 4.
From calendar years 1994 to 2003, the estimated number of women  employees in STEM fields increased from about 2.7 million to about 3.5  million. Overall, there was not a statistically significant change in the  percentage of women employees in the STEM fields. Table 16 shows the  numbers and percentages of men and women employed in the STEM fields  for calendar years 1994 and 2003.
In addition, the estimated number of minorities employed in the STEM  fields as well as the percentage of total STEM employees they constituted  increased, but African American and Hispanic employees remain  underrepresented relative to their percentages in the civilian labor force.  Between 1994 and 2003, the estimated number of African American  employees increased by about 44 percent, the estimated numbers of  Hispanic employees increased by 90 percent, as did the estimated numbers  of other minorities employed in STEM fields. In calendar year 2003,  African Americans comprised about 8.7 percent of STEM employees  compared to about 10.7 percent of the CLF. Similarly, Hispanic employees  comprised about 10 percent of STEM employees in calendar year 2003,  compared to about 12.6 percent of the CLF. Table 17 shows the estimated  percentages of STEM employees by selected racial or ethnic groups in  1994 and 2003.
International employees have filled hundreds of thousands of positions,  many in STEM fields, through the H-1B visa program. However, the  numbers and types of occupations have changed over the years. We  reported that while the limit for the H-1B program was 115,000 in 1999, the  number of visas approved exceeded the limit by more than 20,000 because  of problems with the system used to track the data. Available data show  that in 1999, the majority of the approved occupations were in STEM  fields. Specifically, an estimated 60 percent of the positions approved in  fiscal year 1999 were related to information technology and 5 percent were  for electrical/electronics engineering. By 2002, the limit for the H-1B  program had increased to 195,000, but the number approved, 79,000, did  not reach this limit. In 2003, we reported that the number of approved H- 1B petitions in certain occupations had declined. For example, the number  of approvals for systems analysis/programming positions declined by  106,671 from 2001 to 2002.
Although the estimated total number of employees in STEM fields  increased from 1994 to 2003, according to an NSF report, many with STEM  degrees were not employed in these occupations. In 2004, NSF reported  that about 67 percent of employees with degrees in science or engineering  were employed in fields somewhat or not at all related to their degree.  Specifically, 70 percent of employees with bachelor’s degrees, 51 percent  with master’s degrees, and 54 percent with doctoral degrees reported that  their employment was somewhat or not at all related to their degree in  science or engineering.
In addition to increases in the numbers of employees in STEM fields,  inflation-adjusted median annual wages and salaries increased in all four  STEM fields over the 10-year period (1994 to 2003). These increases  ranged from 6 percent in science to 15 percent in engineering. Figure 5  shows trends in median annual wages and salaries for STEM fields.
section_title: University Officials and Others Cited Several Factors That Influence Decisions about Participation in STEM Fields and Suggested Ways to Encourage Greater Participation
paragraphs: University officials, researchers, and students identified several factors  that influenced students’ decisions about pursuing STEM degrees and  occupations, and they suggested some ways to encourage more  participation in STEM fields. Specifically, university officials said and  researchers reported that the quality of teachers in kindergarten through  12th grades and the levels of mathematics and science courses completed  during high school affected students’ success in and decisions about  STEM fields. In addition, several sources noted that mentoring played a  key role in the participation of women and minorities in STEM fields.  Current students from five universities we visited generally agreed with  these observations, and several said that having good mathematics and  science instruction was important to their overall educational success.  International students’ decisions about participating in STEM education  and occupations were affected by opportunities outside the United States  and the visa process. To encourage more student participation in the  STEM fields, university officials, researchers, and others have made  several suggestions, and four were made repeatedly. These suggestions  focused on teacher quality, high school students’ math and science  preparation, outreach activities, and the federal role in STEM education.
subsections: section_title: Teacher Quality and Mathematics and Science Preparation Were Cited as Key Factors Affecting Domestic Students’ STEM Participation Decisions
paragraphs: University officials frequently cited teacher quality as a key factor that  affected domestic students’ interest in and decisions about pursuing STEM  degrees and occupations. Officials at all eight universities we visited  expressed the view that a student’s experience from kindergarten through  the 12th grades played a large role in influencing whether the student  pursued a STEM degree. Officials at one university we visited said that  students pursuing STEM degrees have associated their interests with  teachers who taught them good skills in mathematics or excited them  about science. On the other hand, officials at many of the universities we  visited told us that some teachers were unqualified and unable to impart  the subject matter, causing students to lose interest in mathematics and  science. For example, officials at one university we visited said that some  elementary and secondary teachers do not have sufficient training to  effectively teach students in the STEM fields and that this has an adverse  effect on what students learn in these fields and reduces the interest and  enthusiasm students express in pursuing coursework in high school,  degree programs in college, or careers in these areas.
Teacher quality issues, in general, have been cited in past reports by  Education. In 2002, Education reported that in the 1999-2000 school year,  14 to 22 percent of middle-grade students taking English, mathematics,  and science were in classes led by teachers without a major, minor, or  certification in these subjects—commonly referred to as “out-of-field”  teachers. Also, approximately 30 to 40 percent of the middle-grade  students in biology/life science, physical science, or English as a second  language/bilingual education classes had teachers lacking these  credentials. At the high school level, 17 percent of students enrolled in  physics and 36 percent of those enrolled in geology/earth/space science  were in classes instructed by out-of-field teachers. The percentages of  students taught by out-of-field teachers were significantly higher when the  criteria used were teacher certification and a major in the subject taught.  For example, 45 percent of the high school students enrolled in  biology/life science and approximately 30 percent of those enrolled in  mathematics, English, and social science classes had out-of-field teachers.  During the 2002-2003 school year, Education reported that the number and  distribution of teachers on waivers—which allowed prospective teachers  in classrooms while they completed their formal training—was  problematic. Also, states reported that the problem of underprepared  teachers was worse on average in districts that serve large proportions of  high-poverty children—the percentage of teachers on waivers was larger  in high-poverty school districts than all other school districts in 39 states.  Moreover, in 2004, Education reported that 48 of the 50 states granted  waivers.
In addition to teacher quality, students’ high school preparation in  mathematics and science was cited by university officials and others as  affecting students’ success in college-level courses and their decisions  about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations. University officials at six  of the eight universities we visited cited students’ ability to opt out of  mathematics and science courses during high school as a factor that  influenced whether they would participate and succeed in the STEM fields  during undergraduate and graduate school. University officials said, for  example, that because many students had not taken higher-level  mathematics and science courses such as calculus and physics in high  school, they were immediately behind other students who were better  prepared. In July 2005, on the basis of findings from the 2004 National  Assessment of Educational Progress, the National Center for Education  Statistics reported that 17 percent of the 17-year-olds reported that they  had taken calculus, and this represents the highest percentage in any  previous assessment year. In a study that solicited the views of several  hundred students who had left the STEM fields, researchers found that the  effects of inadequate high school preparation contributed to college  students’ decisions to leave the science fields. These researchers found  that approximately 40 percent of those college students who left the  science fields reported some problems related to high school science  preparation. The underpreparation was often linked to problems such as  not understanding calculus; lack of laboratory experience or exposure to  computers, and no introduction to theoretical material or to analytic  modes of thought. Further, 12 current students we interviewed said they  were not adequately prepared for college mathematics or science. For  example, one student stated that her high school courses had been limited  because she attended an all-girls school where the curriculum catered to  students who were not interested in STEM, and so it had been difficult to  obtain the courses that were of interest to her.
Several other factors were mentioned during our interviews with  university officials, students, and others as influencing decisions about  participation in STEM fields. These factors included relatively low pay in  STEM fields, additional tuition costs to obtain STEM degrees, lack of  commitment on the part of some students to meet the rigorous academic  demands, and the inability of some professors in STEM fields to effectively  impart their knowledge to students in the classrooms. For example,  officials from five universities said that low pay in STEM fields relative to  other fields such as law and business dissuaded students from pursuing  STEM degrees in some areas. Also, in a study that solicited the views of  college students who left the STEM fields as well as those who continued  to pursue STEM degrees, researchers found that students experienced  greater financial difficulties in obtaining their degrees because of the extra  time needed to obtain degrees in certain STEM fields. Researchers also  noted that poor teaching at the university level was the most common  complaint among students who left as well as those who remained in  STEM fields. Students reported that faculty do not like to teach, do not  value teaching as a professional activity, and therefore lack any incentive  to learn to teach effectively. Finally, 11 of the students we interviewed  commented about the need for professors in STEM fields to alter their  methods and to show more interest in teaching to retain students’  attention.
section_title: Mentoring Cited as a Key Factor Affecting Women’s and Minorities’ STEM Participation Decisions
paragraphs: University officials and students said that mentoring is important for all  students but plays a vital role in the academic experiences of women and  minorities in the STEM fields. Officials at seven of the eight universities  discussed the important role that mentors play, especially for women and  minorities in STEM fields. For example, one professor said that mentors  helped students by advising them on the best track to follow for obtaining  their degrees and achieving professional goals. Also, four students we  interviewed—three women and one man—expressed the importance of  mentors. Specifically, while all four students identified mentoring as  critical to academic success in the STEM fields, two students expressed  their satisfaction since they had mentors, while the other two students  said that it would have been helpful to have had someone who could have  been a mentor or role model.
Studies have also reported that mentors play a significant role in the  success of women and minorities in the STEM fields. In 2004, some of the  women students and faculty with whom we talked reported a strong  mentor was a crucial part in the academic training of some of the women  participating in sciences, and some women had pursued advanced degrees  because of the encouragement and support of mentors. In September  2000, a congressional commission reported that women were adversely  affected throughout the STEM education pipeline and career path by a  lack of role models and mentors. For example, the report found that girls  rejection of mathematics and science may be partially driven by teachers,  parents, and peers when they subtly, and not so subtly, steer girls away  from the informal technical pastimes (such as working on cars, fixing  bicycles, and changing hardware on computers) and science activities  (such as science fairs and clubs) that too often were still thought of as the  province of boys. In addition, the commission reported that a greater  proportion of women switched out of STEM majors than men, relative to  their representation in the STEM major population. Reasons cited for the  higher attrition rate among women students included lack of role models,  distaste for the competitive nature of science and engineering education,  and inability to obtain adequate academic guidance or advice. Further,  according to the report, women’s retention and graduation in STEM  graduate programs were affected by their interaction with faculty,  integration into the department (versus isolation), and other factors,  including whether there were role models, mentors, and women faculty.
section_title: International Students’ STEM Participation Decisions Were Affected by Opportunities Outside the United States and the Visa Process
paragraphs: Officials at seven of the eight universities visited, along with education  policy experts, told us that competition from other countries for top  international students, and educational or work opportunities, affected  international students’ decisions about studying in the United States. They  told us that other countries, including Canada, Australia, New Zealand,  and the United Kingdom, had seized the opportunity since September 11 to  compete against the United States for international students who were  among the best students in the world, especially in the STEM fields. Also,  university officials told us that students from several countries, including  China and India, were being recruited to attend universities and get jobs in  their own countries. In addition, education organizations and associations  have reported that global competition for the best science and engineering  students and scholars is under way. One organization, NAFSA: Association  of International Educators reported that the international student market  has become highly competitive, and the United States is not competing as  well as other countries.
According to university officials, international students’ decisions about  pursuing STEM degrees and occupations in the United States were also  influenced by the perceived unwelcoming attitude of Americans and the  visa process. Officials from three of the universities said that the perceived  unwelcoming attitude of Americans had affected the recruitment of  international students to the United States. Also, officials at six of the eight  universities visited expressed their concern about the impact of the  tightened visa procedures and/or increased security measures since  September 11 on international graduate school enrollments. For example,  officials at one university stated that because of the time needed to  process visas, a few students had missed their class start dates. Officials  from one university told us that they were being more proactive in helping  new international students navigate the visa system, to the extent possible.  While some university officials acknowledged that visa processing had  significantly improved, since 2003 several education associations have  requested further changes in U.S. visa policies because of the lengthy  procedures and time needed to obtain approval to enter the country.
We have reported on various aspects of the visa process, made several  recommendations, and noted that some improvements have been made. In  October 2002 we cited the need for a clear policy on how to balance  national security concerns with the desire to facilitate legitimate travel  when issuing visas and we made several recommendations to help  improve the visa process. In 2003, we reported that the Departments of  State, Homeland Security, and Justice could more effectively manage the  visa function if they had clear and comprehensive policies and procedures  and increased agency coordination and information sharing. In February  2004 and February 2005, we reported on the State Department’s efforts to  improve the program for issuing visas to international science students  and scholars. In 2004 we found that the time to adjudicate a visa depended  largely on whether an applicant had to undergo a security check known as  Visas Mantis, which is designed to protect against sensitive technology  transfers. Based on a random sample of Visas Mantis cases for science  students and scholars, it took State an average of 67 days to complete the  process. In 2005, we reported a significant decline in Visas Mantis  processing times and in the number of cases pending more than 60 days.  We also reported that, in some cases, science students and scholars can  obtain a visa within 24 hours.
We have also issued several reports on SEVIS operations. In June 2004 we  noted that when SEVIS began operating, significant problems were  reported. For example, colleges and universities and exchange programs  had trouble gaining access to the system, and when access was obtained,  these users’ sessions would “time out” before they could complete their  tasks. In that report we also noted that SEVIS performance had improved,  but that several key system performance requirements were not being  measured. In March 2005, we reported that the Department of Homeland  Security (DHS) had taken steps to address our recommendations and that  educational organizations generally agreed that SEVIS performance had  continued to improve. However, educational organizations continued to  cite problems, which they believe created hardships for students and  exchange visitors.
section_title: Several Suggestions Were Made to Encourage More Participation in the STEM Fields
paragraphs: To increase the number of students entering STEM fields, officials from  seven universities and others stated that teacher quality needs to improve.  Officials of one university said that kindergarten through 12th grade  classrooms need teachers who are knowledgeable in the mathematics and  science content areas. As previously noted, Education has reported on the  extent to which classes have been taught by teachers with little or no  content knowledge in the STEM fields. The Congressional Commission on  the Advancement of Women and Minorities reported that teacher  effectiveness is the most important element in a good education. The  commission also suggested that boosting teacher effectiveness can do  more to improve education than any other single factor. States are taking  action to meet NCLBA’s requirement of having all teachers of core  academic subjects be highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006 school  year.
University officials and some students suggested that better preparation  and mandatory courses in mathematics and science were needed for  students during their kindergarten through 12th grade school years.  Officials from five universities suggested that mandatory mathematics and  science courses, especially in high school, may lead to increased student  interest and preparation in the STEM fields. With a greater interest and  depth of knowledge, students would be better prepared and more inclined  to pursue STEM degrees in college. Further, nearly half of the students  who replied to this question suggested that students needed additional  mathematics and science training prior to college. However, adding  mathematics and science classes has resource implications, since more  teachers in these subjects would be needed. Also this change could require  curriculum policy changes that would take time to implement.
More outreach, especially to women and minorities from kindergarten  through the 12th grade, was suggested by university officials, students, and  other organizations. Officials from six of the universities we visited  suggested that increased outreach activities are needed to help create  more interest in mathematics and science for younger students. For  example, at one university we visited, officials told us that through inviting  students to their campuses or visiting local schools, they have provided  some students with opportunities to engage in science laboratories and  hands-on activities that foster interest and excitement for students and can  make these fields more relevant in their lives. Officials from another  university told us that these experiences were especially important for  women and minorities who might not have otherwise had these  opportunities. The current students we interviewed also suggested more  outreach activities. Specifically, two students said that outreach was  needed to further stimulate students’ interest in the STEM fields. One  organization, Building Engineering and Science Talent (BEST), suggested  that research universities increase their presence in prekindergarten  through 12th grade mathematics and science education in order to  strengthen domestic students’ interests and abilities. BEST reported that  one model producing results entailed universities adopting students from  low-income school districts from 7th through 12th grades and providing  them advanced instruction in algebra, chemistry, physics, and  trigonometry. However, officials at one university told us that because of  limited resources, their efforts were constrained and only a few students  would benefit from this type of outreach.
Furthermore, university officials from the eight schools and other  education organizations made suggestions regarding the role of the federal  government. University officials suggested that the federal government  could enhance its role in STEM education by providing more effective  leadership through developing and implementing a national agenda for  STEM education and increasing federal funding for academic research.  Officials at six universities suggested that the federal government  undertake a new initiative modeled after the National Defense Education  Act of 1958, enacted in response to the former Soviet Union’s achievement  in its space program, which provided new funding for mathematics and  science education and training at all education levels. In June 2005, CGS  called for a renewed commitment to graduate education by the federal  government through actions such as providing funds to support students  trained at the doctoral level in the sciences, technology, engineering, and  mathematics; expanding U.S. citizen participation in doctoral study in  selected fields through graduate support awarded competitively to  universities across the country; requiring recruitment, outreach, and  mentoring activities that promote greater participation and success,  especially for underrepresented groups; and fostering interdisciplinary  research preparation. In August 2003, the National Science Board  recommended that the federal government direct substantial new support  to students and institutions in order to improve success in science and  engineering studies by domestic undergraduate students from all  demographic groups. According to this report, such support could include  scholarships and other forms of financial assistance to students, incentives  to institutions to expand and improve the quality of their science and  engineering programs in areas in which degree attainment is insufficient,  financial support to community colleges to increase the success of  students in transferring to 4-year science and engineering programs, and  expanded funding for programs that best succeed in graduating  underrepresented minorities and women in science and engineering. BEST  also suggested that the federal government allocate additional resources  to expand the mathematics and science education opportunities for  underrepresented groups. However, little is known about how well federal  resources have been used in the past. Changes that would require  additional federal funds would likely have an impact on other federal  programs, given the nation’s limited resources and growing fiscal  imbalance, and changing the federal role could take several years.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: While the total numbers of STEM graduates have increased, some fields  have experienced declines, especially at the master’s and doctoral levels.  Given the trends in the numbers and percentages of students pursuing  STEM degrees, particularly advanced degrees, and recent developments  that have influenced international students’ decisions about pursuing  degrees in the United States, it is uncertain whether the number of STEM  graduates will be sufficient to meet future academic and employment  needs and help the country maintain its technological competitive  advantage. Moreover, it is too early to tell if the declines in international  graduate student enrollments will continue in the future. In terms of  employment, despite some gains, the percentage of women in the STEM  workforce has not changed significantly, minority employees remain  underrepresented, and many with degrees in STEM fields are not  employed in STEM occupations.
To help improve the trends in the numbers of students, graduates, and  employees in STEM fields, university officials and others made several  suggestions, such as increasing the federal commitment to STEM  education programs. However, before making changes, it is important to  know the extent to which existing STEM education programs are  appropriately targeted and making the best use of available federal  resources. Additionally, in an era of limited financial resources and  growing federal deficits, information about the effectiveness of these  programs can help guide policy makers and program managers.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We received written comments on a draft of this report from Commerce,  the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), NSF, and NSTC.  These comments are reprinted in appendixes VII, VIII, IX, and X,  respectively. We also received technical comments from the Departments  of Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Labor, and  Transportation; and the Environmental Protection Agency and National  Aeronautics and Space Administration, which we incorporated when  appropriate.
In commenting on a draft of this report, Commerce, HHS, and NSTC  commended GAO for this work. Commerce explicitly concurred with  several findings and agreed with our overall conclusion. However,  Commerce suggested that we revise the conclusion to point out that  despite overall increases in STEM students, the numbers of graduates in  certain fields have declined. We modified the concluding observations to  make this point. HHS agreed with our conclusion that it is important to  evaluate ongoing programs to determine the extent to which they are  achieving their desired results. The comments from NSTC cited  improvements made to help ensure that international students, exchange  visitors, and scientists are able to apply for and receive visas in a timely  manner. We did not make any changes to the report since we had cited  another GAO product that discussed such improvements in the visa  process.
NSF commented about several of our findings. NSF stated that our  program evaluations finding may be misleading largely because the type of  information GAO requested and accepted from agencies was limited to  program level evaluations and did not include evaluations of individual  underlying projects. NSF suggested that we include information on the  range of approaches used to assure program effectiveness. Our finding is  based on agency officials’ responses to a survey question that did not limit  or stipulate the types of evaluations that could have been included.
Nonetheless, we modified the report to acknowledge that NSF uses  various approaches to evaluate its programs.
NSF criticized the methodology we used to support our finding on the  factors that influence decisions about pursuing STEM fields and suggested  that we make it clearer in the body of the report that the findings are  based on interviews with educators and administrators from 8 colleges  and universities, and responses from 31 students. Also, NSF suggested that  we improve the report by including corroborating information from  reports and studies. Our finding was not limited to interviews at the 8  colleges and universities and responses from 31 current students but was  also based on interviews with numerous representatives and policy  experts from various organizations as well as findings from research and  reports—which are cited in the body of the report. Using this approach,  we were able to corroborate the testimonial evidence with data from  reports and research as well as to determine whether information in the  reports and research remained accurate by seeking the views of those  currently teaching or studying in STEM fields. As NSF noted, this  approach yielded reasonable observations. Additional information about  our methodology is listed in appendix I, and we added a bibliography that  identifies the reports and research used during the course of this review.
NSF also commented that the report mentions the NSTC efforts for  interagency collaboration, but does not mention other collaboration  efforts such as the Federal Interagency Committee on Education and the  Federal Interagency Coordinating Council. NSF also pointed out that  interagency collaboration occurs at the program level. We did not modify  the report in response to this comment. In conducting our work, we  determined that the NSTC effort was the primary mechanism for  interagency collaboration focused on STEM programs. The coordinating  groups cited by NSF are focused on different issues. The Federal  Interagency Committee on Education was established to coordinate the  federal programs, policies, and practices affecting education broadly, and  the Federal Interagency Coordinating Council was established to minimize  duplication of programs and activities relating to children with disabilities.
In addition, NSF provided information to clarify examples related to their  programs that we cited in the report, stated that some data categories  were not clear, and commented on the graduate level enrollment data we  used in the report. NSF pointed out that while its program called  Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences is designed to  increase participation by minorities, it does not limit eligibility to  minorities. Also, NSF noted that while the draft report correctly indicated  that students receiving scholarships or fellowships from NSF must be U.S.  citizens or permanent residents, the reason given for limiting participation  in these programs in the draft report was not accurate. According to NSF,  these restrictions are considered to be an effective strategy to support its  goal of creating a diverse, competitive and globally engaged U.S.  workforce of scientists, engineers, technologists and well prepared  citizens. We revised the report to reflect these changes. Further, NSF  commented that the data categories were not clear, particularly the  technology degrees and occupations, and that the data did not include  associate degrees. We added information that lists all of the occupations  included in the analysis, and we added footnotes to clarify which data  included associate degrees and which ones did not. In addition,  NSF  commented that the graduate level enrollment data for international  students based on NPSAS data are questionable in comparison with other  available data and that this may be because the NPSAS data include a  relatively small sample for graduate education. We considered using  NPSAS and other data but decided to use the NPSAS data for two reasons:   NPSAS data were more comprehensive and more current. Specifically, the  NPSAS data were available through the 2003-2004 academic year and  included numbers and characteristics of students enrolled for all degree  fields—STEM and non-STEM—for all education levels, and citizenship  information.
Copies of this report are being sent to the Secretaries of Agriculture,  Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Interior,  Homeland Security, Labor, and Transportation; the Administrators for the  Environmental Protection Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space  Administration; and the Directors of the National Science Foundation and  the National Science and Technology Council; appropriate congressional  committees; and interested parties. Copies will be made available to others  upon request. The report is also available on GAO’s Web site at  http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me  on (202) 512-7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are  listed in appendix VII.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
subsections: section_title: Objectives
paragraphs: The objectives of our study were to determine (1) the number of federal  civilian education programs funded in fiscal year 2004 that were  specifically designed to increase the number of students and graduates  pursuing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)  degrees and occupations, or improve educational programs in STEM  fields, and what agencies report about their effectiveness; (2) how the  numbers, percentages, and characteristics of students, graduates, and  employees in STEM fields have changed over the years; and (3) factors  cited by educators and others as influencing people’s decisions about  pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and suggestions to encourage  greater participation in STEM fields.
section_title: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: In conducting our review, we used multiple methodologies. We (1)  conducted a survey of federal departments and agencies that sponsored  education programs specifically designed to increase the number of  students and graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or  improve educational programs in STEM fields; (2) obtained and analyzed  data, including the most recent data available, on students, graduates, and  employees in STEM fields and occupations; (3) visited eight colleges and  universities; (4) reviewed reports and studies; and (5) interviewed agency  officials, representatives and policy experts from various organizations,  and current students. We conducted our work between October 2004 and  October 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards.
section_title: Survey
paragraphs: To provide Congress with a better understanding of what programs federal  agencies were supporting to increase the nation’s pool of scientists,  technologists, engineers, and mathematicians, we designed a survey to  determine (1) the number of federal education programs (prekindergarten  through postdoctorate) designed to increase the quantity of students and  graduates pursuing STEM degrees and occupations or improve the  educational programs in STEM fields and (2) what agencies reported  about the effectiveness of these programs. The survey asked the officials  to describe the goals, target population, and funding levels for fiscal years  2003, 2004, and 2005 of such programs. In addition, the officials were  asked when the programs began and if the programs had been or were  being evaluated.
We identified the agencies likely to support STEM education programs by  reviewing the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and the Department  of Education’s Eisenhower National Clearinghouse, Guidebook of Federal  Resources for K-12 Mathematics and Science, 2004-05. Using these  resources, we identified 15 agencies with STEM education programs. The  survey was conducted via e-mail using an ActiveX enabled MSWord  attachment. A contact point was designated for each agency, and  questionnaires were sent to that individual. One questionnaire was  completed for each program the agency sponsored. Agency officials were  asked to provide confirming documentation for their responses whenever  possible.
The questionnaire was forwarded to agencies on February 15, 2005, and  responses were received through early May 2005. We received 244  completed surveys and determined that 207 of them met the criteria for  STEM programs. The following agencies participated in our survey: the  Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Homeland  Security, Interior, Labor, and Transportation. In addition, the Health  Resources and Services Administration, Indian Health Service, and  National Institutes of Health, all part of Health and Human Services, took  part in the survey. Also participating were the U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;  and the National Science Foundation. Labor’s programs did not meet our  criteria for 2004 and the Department of Defense (DOD) did not submit a  survey. According to DOD officials, DOD needed 3 months to complete the  survey and therefore could not provide responses within the time frames  of our work. We obtained varied amounts of documentation from 13  civilian agencies for the 207 STEM education programs funded in 2004 and  information about the effectiveness of some programs.
Because we administered the survey to all of the known federal agencies  sponsoring STEM education programs, our results are not subject to  sampling error. However, the practical difficulties of conducting any  survey may introduce other types of errors, commonly referred to as  nonsampling errors. For example, differences in how a particular question  is interpreted, the sources of information available to respondents in  answering a question, or the types of people who do not respond can  introduce unwanted variability into the survey results. We included steps  in the development of the survey, the collection of data, and the editing  and analysis of data for the purpose of minimizing such nonsampling  errors. To reduce nonsampling error, the questionnaire was reviewed by  survey specialists and pretested in person with three officials from  agencies familiar with STEM education programs to develop a  questionnaire that was relevant, easy to comprehend, unambiguous, and  unbiased. We made changes to the content and format of the questionnaire  based on the specialists’ reviews and the results of the pretests. To further  reduce nonsampling error, data for this study returned electronically were  entered directly into the instrument by the respondents and converted into  a database for analysis. Completed questionnaires returned as hard copy  were keypunched, and a sample of these records was verified by  comparing them with their corresponding questionnaires, and any errors  were corrected. When the data were analyzed, a second, independent  analyst checked all computer programs. Finally, to assess the reliability of  key data obtained from our survey about some of the programs, we  compared the responses with the documentation provided, or we  independently researched the information from other publicly available  sources.
section_title: Analyses of Student, Graduate, and Employee Data
paragraphs: To determine how the numbers and characteristics of students, graduates,  and employees in STEM fields have changed, we obtained and analyzed  data from the Department of Education (Education) and the Department  of Labor. Specifically, we analyzed the National Postsecondary Student  Aid Study (NPSAS) data and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data  System (IPEDS) data from the Department of Education’s National Center  for Education Statistics (NCES), and we analyzed data from the  Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Current  Population Survey (CPS). Based on National Science Foundation’s  categorization of STEM fields, we developed STEM fields of study from  NPSAS and IPEDS, and identified occupations from the CPS. Using these  data sources, we developed nine STEM fields for students, eight STEM  fields for graduates, and four broad STEM fields for occupations.
For our data reliability assessment, we reviewed agency documentation on  the data sets and conducted electronic tests of the files.  On the basis of  these reviews, we determined that the required data elements from   NPSAS, IPEDS and CPS were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. These  data sources, type, time span, and years analyzed are shown in table 18.
NPSAS is a comprehensive nationwide study designed to determine how  students and their families pay for postsecondary education, and to  describe some demographic and other characteristics of those enrolled.   The study is based on a nationally representative sample of students in  postsecondary education institutions, including undergraduate, graduate,  and first-professional students. The NPSAS has been conducted every  several years since the 1986-1987 academic year. For this report, we  analyzed the results of the NPSAS survey for the 1995-1996 academic year  and the 2003-2004 academic year to compare student enrollment and  demographic characteristics between these two periods for the nine STEM  fields and non-STEM fields.
Because the NPSAS sample is a probability sample of students, the sample  is only one of a large number of samples that might have been drawn.  Since each sample could have provided different estimates, confidence in  the precision of the particular sample’s results is expressed as a 95-percent  confidence interval (for example, plus or minus 4 percentage points). This  is the interval that would contain the actual population value for 95  percent of the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95  percent confident that each of the confidence intervals in this report will  include the true values in the study population. NPSAS estimates used in  this report and the upper and lower bounds of the 95 percent confidence  intervals for each estimate relied on in this report are presented in  appendix V.
IPEDS is a single, comprehensive system designed to encompass all  institutions and educational organizations whose primary purpose is to  provide postsecondary education. IPEDS is built around a series of  interrelated surveys to collect institution-level data in such areas as  enrollments, program completions, faculty, staff, and finances. For this  report, we analyzed the results of IPEDS data for the 1994-1995 academic  year and the 2002-2003 academic year to compare the numbers and  characteristics of graduates with degrees in eight STEM fields and non- STEM fields.
To analyze changes in employees in STEM and non-STEM fields, we  obtained employment estimates from BLS’s Current Population Survey  March supplement for 1995 through 2004 (calendar years 1994 through  2003). The CPS is a monthly survey of households conducted by the U.S.  Census Bureau (Census) for BLS. The CPS provides a comprehensive body  of information on the employment and unemployment experience of the  nation’s population, classified by age, sex, race, and a variety of other  characteristics. A more complete description of the survey, including  sample design, estimation, and other methodology can be found in the CPS  documentation prepared by Census and BLS.
This March supplement (the Annual Demographic Supplement) is  specifically designed to estimate family characteristics, including income  from all sources and occupation and industry classification of the job held  longest during the previous year. It is conducted during the month of  March each year because it is believed that since March is the month  before the deadline for filing federal income tax returns, respondents  would be more likely to report income more accurately than at any other  point during the year.
We used the CPS data to produce estimates on (1) four STEM fields, (2)  men and women, (3) two separate minority groups (Black or African  American, and Hispanic or Latino origin), and (4) median annual wages  and salaries. The measures of median annual wages and salaries could  include bonuses, but do not include noncash benefits such as health  insurance or pensions. CPS salary reported in March of each year was for  the longest held position actually worked the year before and reported by  the worker himself (or a knowledgeable member of the household). Tables  19 and 20 list the classification codes and occupations included in our  analysis of CPS data over a 10-year period (1994-2003). In developing the  STEM groups, we considered the occupational requirements and  educational attainment of individuals in certain occupations. We also  excluded doctors and other health care providers except registered  nurses. During the period of review, some codes and occupation titles  were changed; we worked with BLS officials to identify variations in codes  and occupations and accounted for these changes where appropriate and  possible.
Because the CPS is a probability sample based on random selections, the  sample is only one of a large number of samples that might have been  drawn. Since each sample could have provided different estimates,  confidence in the precision of the particular sample’s results is expressed  as a 95 percent confidence interval (e.g., plus or minus 4 percentage  points). This is the interval that would contain the actual population value  for 95 percent of the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we  are 95 percent confident that each of the confidence intervals in this  report will include the true values in the study population. We use the CPS  general variance methodology to estimate this sampling error and report it  as confidence intervals. Percentage estimates we produce from the CPS  data have 95 percent confidence intervals of plus or minus 6 percentage  points or less. Estimates other than percentages have 95 percent  confidence intervals of no more than plus or minus 10 percent of the  estimate itself, unless otherwise noted. Consistent with the CPS  documentation guidelines, we do not produce estimates based on the  March supplement data for populations of less than 75,000.
GAO’s internal control procedures provide reasonable assurance that our  data analyses are appropriate for the purposes we are using them. These  procedures include, but are not limited to, having skilled staff perform the  analyses, supervisory review by senior analysts, and indexing/referencing  (confirming that the analyses are supported by the underlying audit  documentation) activities.
section_title: College and University Visits
paragraphs: We interviewed administrators and professors during site visits to eight  colleges and universities—the University of California at Los Angeles and  the University of Southern California in California; Clark Atlanta  University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and Spelman College in  Georgia; the University of Illinois; Purdue University in Indiana; and  Pennsylvania State University. These colleges and universities were  selected based on the following factors: large numbers of domestic and  international students in STEM fields, a mix of public and private  institutions, number of doctoral degrees conferred, and some geographic  diversity. We also selected three minority-serving colleges and universities,  one of which serves only women students. Clark Atlanta University and  Spelman College were selected, in part, because of their partnerships with  the College of Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology. During  these visits we asked the university officials about factors that influenced  whether people pursue a STEM education or occupations and suggestions  for addressing those factors that may influence participation. For example,  we asked university officials to identify (1) issues related to the education  pipeline; (2) steps taken by their university to alleviate some of the  conditions that may discourage student participation in STEM areas; and  (3) the federal role, if any, in attracting and retaining domestic students in  STEM fields. We also obtained documents on programs they sponsored to  help support STEM students and graduates.
section_title: Reviews of Reports and Studies
paragraphs: We reviewed several articles, reports, and books related to trends in STEM  enrollment and factors that have an effect on people’s decisions to pursue  STEM fields. For two studies, we evaluated the methodological soundness  using common social science and statistical practices. We examined each  study’s methodology, including its limitations, data sources, analyses, and  conclusions.
Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, by  Elaine Seymour and Nancy Hewitt. This study used interviews and  focus groups/group interviews at selected universities to identify self- reported reasons for changing majors from science, mathematics, or  engineering. The study had four primary objectives: (1) to identify  sources of qualitative differences in educational experiences of  science, mathematics, and engineering students at higher educational  institutions of different types; (2) to identify differences in structure,  culture, and pedagogy of science, mathematics, and engineering  departments and the impact on student retention; (3) to compare and  contrast causes of science, mathematics, and engineering students’  attrition by race/ethnicity and gender; and (4) to estimate the relative  importance of factors found to contribute to science, mathematics, and  engineering students’ attrition. The researchers selected seven  universities to represent the types of colleges and universities that  supply most of the nations’ scientists, mathematicians, and engineers.  The types of institutions were selected to test whether there are  differences in educational experiences, culture and pedagogy,  race/ethnicity and gender attrition, and reasons for attrition by type of  institution. Because the selection of students was not strictly random  and because there is no documentation that the data were weighted to  reflect the proportions of types of students selected, it is not possible  to determine confidence intervals. Thus it is not possible to say which  differences are statistically significant. The findings are now more than  a decade old and thus might not reflect current pedagogy and other  factors about the educational experience, students, or the  socioeconomic environment. It is important to note that the  quantitative results of this study are based on the views of one  constituency or stakeholder—students. Views of faculty, school  administrators, graduates, professional associations, and employers are  not included.
NCES’s Qualifications of the Public School Teacher Workforce:  Prevalence of Out-of-Field Teaching, 1987-1988 to 1999-2000 report.  This study is an analysis based upon the Schools and Staffing Survey  for 1999-2000. The report was issued in 2004 by the Institute of  Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. NCES’s Schools  and Staffing Survey (SASS) is a representative sample of U.S. schools,  districts, principals, and teachers. The report focusing on teacher’s  qualifications uses data from the district and teacher portion of SASS.  The 1999-2000 SASS included a nationally representative sample of  public schools and universe of all public charter schools with students  in any of grades 1 through 12 and in operation in school year 1999-2000.  The 1999-2000 SASS administration also included nationally  representative samples of teachers in the selected public and public  charter schools who taught students in grades kindergarten through 12  in school year 1999-2000. There were 51,811 public school teachers in  the sample and 42,086 completed public school teacher interviews. In  addition, there are 3,617 public charter school teachers in the sample  with 2,847 completed interviews. The overall weighted teacher  response rate was 76.7 percent for public school teachers and 71.8  percent for public charter school teachers. NCES has strong standards  for carrying out educational surveys. The Office of Management and  Budget vetted the questionnaire and sample design. The Census Bureau  carried out survey quality control and data editing. One potential  limitation is the amount of time it takes the Census Bureau to get the  data from field collection to public release, but this is partly due to the  thoroughness of the data quality steps followed. The SASS survey  meets GAO standards for use as evidence in a report.
section_title: Interviews
paragraphs: We interviewed officials from 13 federal agencies with STEM education  programs to obtain information about the STEM programs and their views  on related topics, including factors that influence students’ decisions  about pursuing STEM degrees and occupations, and the extent of  coordination among the federal agencies. We also interviewed officials  from the National Science and Technology Council to discuss coordination  efforts. In addition, we interviewed representatives and policy experts  from various organizations. These organizations were the American  Association for the Advancement of Science, the Commission on  Professionals in Science and Technology, the Council of Graduate  Schools, NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the National  Academies, and the Council on Competitiveness.
We also conducted interviews via e-mail with 31 students. We asked  officials from the eight universities visited to identify students to complete  our e-mail interviews, and students who completed the interviews  attended five of the colleges we visited. Of the 31 students: 16 attended  Purdue University, 6 attended the University of Southern California, 6  attended Spelman College, 2 attended the University of California Los  Angeles, and 1 attended the Georgia Institute of Technology. In addition,  19 students were undergraduates and 12 were graduate students; 19  students identified themselves as women and 12 students identified  themselves as men. Of the 19 undergraduate students, 9 said that they plan  to pursue graduate work in a STEM field.
section_title: Appendix II: List of 207 Federal STEM Education Programs
paragraphs: Based on surveys submitted by officials representing the 13 civilian federal  agencies, table 21 contains a list of the 207 science, technology,  engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs funded in  fiscal year 2004.
section_title: Appendix III: Federal STEM Education Programs Funded at $10 Million or More
paragraphs: The federal civilian agencies reported that the following science,  technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs  were funded with at least $10 million in either fiscal year 2004 or 2005.  However, programs that received $10 million or more in fiscal year 2004  but were unfunded for fiscal year 2005 were excluded from table 22.  Agency officials also provided the program descriptions in table 22.
section_title: Appendix IV: Data on Students and Graduates in STEM Fields
paragraphs: Table 23 provides estimates for the numbers of students in science,  technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields by education  level for the 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years. Tables 24 and 25  provide additional information regarding students in STEM fields by  gender for the 1995-1996 and 2003-2004 academic years. Table 26 provides  additional information regarding graduates in STEM fields by gender for  the 1994-1995 and 2002-2003 academic years. Appendix V contains  confidence intervals for these estimates.
section_title: Appendix V: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Students at the Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral Levels
paragraphs: Because the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) sample is  a probability sample of students, the sample is only one of a large number  of samples that might have been drawn. Since each sample could have  provided different estimates, confidence in the precision of the particular  sample’s results is expressed as a 95-percent confidence interval (for  example, plus or minus 4 percentage points). This is the interval that  would contain the actual population value for 95 percent of the samples  that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95 percent confident that  each of the confidence intervals in this report will include the true values  in the study population. The upper and lower bounds of the 95 percent  confidence intervals for each estimate relied on in this report are  presented in the following tables.
section_title: Appendix VI: Confidence Intervals for Estimates of STEM Employment by Gender, Race or Ethnicity, and Wages and Salaries
paragraphs: The current population survey (CPS) was used to obtain estimates about  employees and wages and salaries in science, technology, engineering, and  mathematics (STEM) fields. Because the current population survey (CPS)  is a probability sample based on random selections, the sample is only one  of a large number of samples that might have been drawn. Since each  sample could have provided different estimates, confidence in the  precision of the particular sample’s results is expressed as a 95 percent  confidence interval (e.g., plus or minus 4 percentage points). This is the  interval that would contain the actual population value for 95 percent of  the samples that could have been drawn. As a result, we are 95 percent  confident that each of the confidence intervals in this report will include  the true values in the study population. We use the CPS general variance  methodology to estimate this sampling error and report it as confidence  intervals. Percentage estimates we produce from the CPS data have 95  percent confidence intervals of plus or minus 6 percentage points or less.  Estimates other than percentages have 95 percent confidence intervals of  no more than plus or minus 10 percent of the estimate itself, unless  otherwise noted. Consistent with the CPS documentation guidelines, we  do not produce estimates based on the March supplement data for  populations of less than 75,000.
section_title: Appendix VII: Comments from the Department of Commerce
section_title: Appendix VIII: Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services
section_title: Appendix IX: Comments from the National Science Foundation
section_title: Appendix X: Comments from the National Science and Technology Council
section_title: Appendix XI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Carolyn M. Taylor, Assistant  Director; Tim Hall, Analyst in Charge; Mark Ward; Dorian Herring; Patricia  Bundy; Paula Bonin; Scott Heacock; Wilfred Holloway; Lise Levie; John  Mingus; Mark Ramage; James Rebbe; and Monica Wolford made key  contributions to this report.
section_title: Bibliography
paragraphs: Congressional Research Service, Foreign Students in the United States:  Policies and Legislation, RL31146, January 24, 2003, Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Immigration: Legislative Issues on  Nonimmigrant Professional Specialty (H-1B) Workers, RL30498, May 5,  2005, Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Monitoring Foreign Students in the  United States: The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System  (SEVIS), RL32188, October 20, 2004, Washington, D.C.
Congressional Research Service, Science, Engineering, and Mathematics  Education: Status and Issues, 98-871 STM, April 27, 2004, Washington,  D.C.
Council on Competitiveness, Innovate America, December 2004,  Washington, D.C.
Council of Graduate Schools, NDEA 21: A Renewed Commitment to  Graduate Education, June 2005, Washington, D.C.
Institute of International Education, Open Doors: Report on International  Educational Exchange, 2004, New York.
Jackson, Shirley Ann, The Quiet Crisis: Falling Short in Producing  American Scientific and Technical Talent, Building Engineering &  Science Talent, September 2002, San Diego, California.
NAFSA: Association of International Educators, In America’s Interest:  Welcoming International Students, Report of the Strategic Task Force on  International Student Access, January 14, 2003, Washington, D.C.
NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Toward an International  Education Policy for the United States: International Education in an  Age of Globalism and Terrorism, May 2003, Washington, D.C.
National Center for Education Statistics, Qualifications of the Public  School Teacher Workforce: Prevalence of Out-of-Field Teaching 1987-88  to 1999-2000, May 2002, revised August 2004, Washington, D.C.
National Science Foundation, The Science and Engineering Workforce  Realizing America’s Potential, National Science Board, August 14, 2003,  Arlington, Virginia.
National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators, 2004,  Volume 1, National Science Board, January 15, 2004, Arlington, Virginia.
Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women  and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development,  Land of Plenty: Diversity as America’s Competitive Edge in Science,  Engineering, and Technology, September 2000.
A Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and  Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Before It’s Too Late, September 27,  2000.
Seymour, Elaine, and Nancy M. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why  Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Westview Press, 1997, Boulder,  Colorado.
The National Academies, Policy Implications of International Graduate  Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States, 2005,  Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,  Institute of Education Sciences, The Nation’s Report Card, NAEP 2004:  Trends in Academic Progress, July 2005, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Education, The Secretary’s Third Annual Report on  Teacher Quality, Office of Postsecondary Education, 2004, Washington,  D.C.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2003 Yearbook of Immigration  Statistics, Office of Immigration Statistics, September 2004, Washington,  D.C.