Science Education Initiative

There was a debate taking place on the U.S. Senate floor yesterday about the need to mobilize ourselves as a nation and push for greater science and math education with increased federal funding. The reason given is that we are graduating a paltry amount of engineers and scientists compared to China and India while nationwide our children's performance on standardized tests in science and math is very low, compared to several other countries. We, say the senators, can look back in history after the Soviets successfully launched their Sputnik satellite into space in 1957 and our reaction to that as a guide for what to do. At that time, the Eisenhower and Kennedy presidencies signed bills passed by Congress greatly increasing the funding for more science and math education. Our heightened call to competitiveness dramatically culminated in a series of successful moon landings from 1969 to 1973 and kept our general level of technology far ahead of our competitors.

I agree that we should push for more and better education in science, engineering, and mathematics. However, it must be noted that a great political initiative like this is much more likely to succeed if there is a punctuated, dramatic event that provokes it. Sputnik was one such event. The 9/11 attack on our country was another that changed the political climate dramatically enough to push through other big changes, be they ultimately for better or for worse.

I remember throughout elementary school being shown films from a science education series funded by Bell Telephone and probably the government. These films, starring bald, bespectacled scientist/educator Dr. Frank Baxter, were produced in that post-Sputnik period that spurred political and nationwide interest in science. It featured very compelling and inspiring films about time, the sun, the weather, our heart and circulatory system, our nervous system, cosmic rays (as an introduction to subatomic physics), DNA and heredity, and language (I probably left out one or two). Another example of what happened then was when science fiction writer Isaac Asimov responded to Sputnik by embarking on a new career of prolifically writing primarily non-fiction science education books that introduced basic principles and facts in the various disciplines without drowning the reader (presumed to be a newcomer to the field) in intricate mathematics.

So, it is not enough to see a problem like this and pour a lot of money into it. That may be a necessary component of the solution, of course, but there are two other components to success as well. First, the problem in our nation's science education needs to be portrayed somehow in a vivid way that can, like Sputnik, serve as a symbol. Short of the Chinese landing their astronauts on the moon, I don't see this happening soon. Second, science education in the elementary and secondary school levels has to convey encouragement and inspiration beyond the technical expertise in the concerned areas. Besides television shows like Nova and some on the Discovery Channel that depict the excitement and fulfillment underlying scientific discoveries, I believe that this area is lacking as well. But the current undertaking is worthwhile nevertheless. And, with the financial underpinning in place, events may transpire that provide the social impetus to value these important educational fields as an indispensable investment in our national future.