Journal of Science Policy & Governance
​Volume 20, Issue 02 | May 16, 2022

Op-Ed: Words Matter: Defining opportunities in STEM to improve rural and urban student outcomes

Benjamin Mansky (1), Rachel Piselli (2), Emily Quarato (3) 
  1. University of Rochester, Center for Translational Neuromedicine, Rochester, NY 
  2. University of Rochester, Department of Pathology, Rochester, NY 
  3. University of Rochester, Department of Environmental Medicine, Rochester, NY 

Corresponding author: [email protected]
Keywords: STEM education; technology; rural education; educator preparedness; informal education
https://doi.org/10.38126/JSPG200206 ​

Executive Summary

In the United States, significant gaps remain for achieving gender and racial equity in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers.  Although our K-12 education system has made some progress in innovating STEM curricula, the U.S. still lags behind other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has introduced new challenges in STEM education, which often require in-person experiential learning. Fortunately, with the advent of COVID-19 more people have come to appreciate the role technology can play in education. While technology certainly has many benefits for the educational process, there is a significant gap in opportunity between those from different socioeconomic and rural backgrounds in the U.S. To ensure the development of a diverse STEM workforce, the House of Representatives needs to take significant action to reduce inequity in STEM learning and outreach. We recommend that the House of Representatives Committee on Science, Technology, and Space clarify the wording within the Innovation for Informal STEM Learning Act (H.R. 3859) to better target underrepresented populations from both rural and urban communities and the House of Representatives Committee of Education and Labor specify the definition of ‘qualified apprenticeship program’ within the STEM K to Career Act (H.R.4727). ​

-Read the full article through download.-

Background header image courtesy of NSTA
Benjamin Mansky, Ph.D. is a postdoctoral associate at the Center for Translational Neuromedicine at the University of Rochester. He studies how the epigenomes of glial progenitor cells change with age, and how this may be leveraged to improve cell-based therapeutics. After his post-doctoral work, he aims to continue working on stem cell therapies in the biotechnology sector. 
​
Rachel Piselli, M.S. is a fourth-year Ph.D. candidate in the Cell Biology of Disease Graduate Program at the University of Rochester. Her research is focused on understanding the genetic requirements for differentiation during development. Upon completion of her graduate studies Rachel intends to further pursue research as a postdoctoral fellow. 

Emily Quarato, M.S. is a fourth-year Ph.D. candidate in the Toxicology program at the University of Rochester. Her research is focused on understanding how radiation impacts the components of the bone marrow microenvironment that support bone formation. After earning her Ph.D., Emily plans to pursue a career in science policy and community education.

References

  1. Achieve Inc. “Attitudes Toward Science Education: Key Findings From A National Survey.” Next Generation Science Standards. 2012. https://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/AttitudesTowardScienceEducation1pagerv6.pdf
  2. Aguilera, David, and Jairo Ortiz-Revilla. "STEM vs. STEAM education and student creativity: A systematic literature review." Education Sciences 11, no. 7 (2021): 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070331
  3. Akiri, Effrat, and Yehudit Judy Dori. "Professional Growth of Novice and Experienced STEM Teachers." Journal of Science Education and Technology 31, no. 1 (2022): 129-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09936-x
  4. Auxier, Brooke, and Monica Anderson. "As schools close due to the coronavirus, some US students face a digital ‘homework gap’." Pew Research Center 16 (2020): 1-8. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/16/as-schools-close-due-to-the-coronavirus-some-u-s-students-face-a-digital-homework-gap/
  5. Baxter, Juliet A, Angie Ruzicka, Ronald A Beghetto, and Dean Livelybrooks. “Professional Development Strategically Connecting Mathematics and Science: The Impact on Teachers’ Confidence and Practice: Professional Development Strategic Connections.” School science and mathematics 114, no. 3 (2014): 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12060
  6. DeFazio, Peter A. H.R. 3684 – 117th Congress (2021-2022): Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Division F Sections 60101-60604. . 4 June 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684
  7. Estriegana, Rosa, José-Amelio Medina-Merodio, and Roberto Barchino. "Student acceptance of virtual laboratory and practical work: An extension of the technology acceptance model." Computers & Education 135 (2019): 1-14.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.010
  8. Fauth, Benjamin, Jasmin Decristan, Anna-Theresia Decker, Gerhard Büttner, Ilonca Hardy, Eckhard Klieme, and Mareike Kunter. “The Effects of Teacher Competence on Student Outcomes in Elementary Science Education: The Mediating Role of Teaching Quality.” Teaching and teacher education 86 (2019): 102882–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102882
  9. Finson, Kevin D. "Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings." School science and mathematics 102, no. 7 2002: 335-345.
  10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb18217.x
  11. Fry, Rick, Brian Kennedy, and Cary Funk. "STEM Jobs See Uneven Progress in Increasing Gender, Racial and Ethnic Diversity: Higher Education Pipeline Suggests Long Path Ahead for Increasing Diversity, Especially in Fields Like Computing and Engineering." Pew Research Center (2021). https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/
  12. Henriksen, Danah, Michael Henderson, Edwin Creely, Sona Ceretkova, Miroslava Černochová, Evgenia Sendova, Erkko T. Sointu, and Christopher H. Tienken. "Creativity and technology in education: An international perspective." Technology, Knowledge and Learning 23, no. 3 (2018): 409-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9380-1
  13. Insider, Market, and Business Insider. "Global Edtech investments reach a staggering $18.66 billion." Markets Insider (2019). https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/2019-global-edtech-investments-reach-a-staggering-18-66-billion-1028800669. 
  14. John Lemay, David, Tenzin Doleck, and Paul Bazelais. "Transition to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic." Interactive Learning Environments (2021): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100130
  15. Killgrove, Kristina. “How The ‘Skype A Scientist’ Program Combats Fake News Through Public Education.” Forbes. 2019. www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2019/02/27/how-the-skype-a-scientist-program-combats-fake-news-through-public-education/
  16. Kim, Young. H.R.3859 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): To Encourage and ... 14 June 2021, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3859
  17. Kirtman, Lisa. "Online versus in-class courses: An examination of differences in learning outcomes." Issues in teacher education 18, no. 2 (2009): 103-116. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/68112/.
  18. Kirtman, Nisaa, Teresa Demeritte, Cary Smith, Vida Amouzandeh. “Targeted, Sustainable., Adept: Transforming Jackson State University STEM PD Delivery for Mississippi 6-12th Grade Teachers During COVID-19.” Journal of Stem Outreach 4 no. 4 (October 2021): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.15695/jstem/v4i4.04. 
  19. Madden, Lauren, James Beyers, and Steve O’Brien. “The Importance of STEM Education in the Elementary Grades: Learning from Pre-Service and Novice Teachers’ Perspectives.” The electronic journal of science education 20, no. 5 (2016): 1–. https://ejrsme.icrsme.com/article/view/15871
  20.  Madden, Lauren, James E.R. Beyers, Nicole Stanton. “Future Elementary Teachers’ Perspectives on the Importance of STEM.” In Critical Questions in STEM Education, edited by Valarie L. Akerson and Gayle A. Buck, 211-225. Switzerland: Springer Nature, 2020. Accessed January 19, 2022. https://link-springer-com.ezp.lib.rochester.edu/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-030-57646-2_12#cities
  21. Martinez, Anthony, and Cheridan Christnacht. “Women Making Gains in STEM Occupations but Still Underrepresented.” The United States Census Bureau, January 26, 2021. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/01/women-making-gains-in-stem-occupations-but-still-underrepresented.html
  22. Miller, David I., Kyle M. Nolla, Alice H. Eagly, and David H. Uttal. "The development of children's gender‐science stereotypes: a meta‐analysis of 5 decades of US draw‐a‐scientist studies." Child development 89, no. 6 (2018): 1943-1955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039
  23. Murphy, T. P. “Graduating STEM Competent and Confident Teachers: The Creation of a STEM Certificate for Elementary Education Majors.” Journal of college science teaching. 42, no. 2 (2012).
  24. Nadelson, Louis S, Janet Callahan, Patricia Pyke, Anne Hay, Matthew Dance, and Joshua Pfiester. “Teacher STEM Perception and Preparation: Inquiry-Based STEM Professional Development for Elementary Teachers.” The Journal of educational research (Washington, D.C.) 106, no. 2 (2013a): 157–168. doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.667014
  25. National Center for Education Statistics. “2019 NAEP Mathematics and Reading Assessments: Highlighted Results at Grades 4 and 8 for the Nation, States, and Districts.” October 2019. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020012 
  26. National Science Teaching Association. “About the Next Generation Science Standards.” 2014. https://ngss.nsta.org/About.aspx
  27. Potkonjak, Veljko, Michael Gardner, Victor Callaghan, Pasi Mattila, Christian Guetl, Vladimir M. Petrović, and Kosta Jovanović. "Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review." Computers & Education 95 (2016): 309-327. doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002
  28.  Rinke, Carol R, Wendy Gladstone-Brown, C. Ryan Kinlaw, and Jean Cappiello. “Characterizing STEM Teacher Education: Affordances and Constraints of Explicit STEM Preparation for Elementary Teachers: Characterizing STEM Teacher Education.” School science and mathematics 116, no. 6 (2016): 300–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12185
  29. Rotermund, Susan and Amy Burke.  “Elementary and Secondary STEM Education | NSF - National Science Foundation.” 2021. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20211
  30. Schutte, Jerald G. Virtual Teaching in Higher Education: The New Intellectual Superhighway Or Just Another Traffic Jam?. Jerald G. Schutte., 1997.
  31. Smith, P. Sean, Peggy J. Trygstad, and Eric R. Banilower. 2016. "Widening The Gap: Unequal Distribution Of Resources For K–12 Science Instruction". Education Policy Analysis Archives 24: 8. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.24.2207 
  32. Starrett, Angela, Jan Yow, Christine Lotter, Matthew J Irvin, and Paula Adams. “Teachers Connecting with Rural Students and Places: A Mixed Methods Analysis.” Teaching and teacher education 97 (2021): 103231–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103231
  33. Swalwell, Eric. H.R.4727 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Stem K to Career ... 27 July 2021,     https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4727?r=22
  34.  Thibaut, Lieve, Heidi Knipprath, Wim Dehaene, and Fien Depaepe. “The Influence of Teachers’ Attitudes and School Context on Instructional Practices in Integrated STEM Education.” Teaching and teacher education 71 (2018): 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014
  35. Thomson, Margareta M, Erin Huggins, and Wayne Williams. “Developmental Science Efficacy Trajectories of Novice Teachers from a STEM-Focused Program: A Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Investigation.” Teaching and teacher education 77 (2019): 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.010
  36. Trotman, Andrew. “Why Don't European Girls like Science or Technology?” Microsoft News Centre Europe, November 29, 2017. https://news.microsoft.com/europe/features/dont-european-girls-like-science-technology/
  37.  “Understanding the Standards”, Next Generation Science Standards. 2013. https://www.nextgenscience.org/understanding-standards/understanding-standards
  38. Varma, Tina, Mark Volkmann, and Deborah Hanuscin. "Preservice elementary teachers’ perceptions of their understanding of inquiry and inquiry-based science pedagogy: Influence of an elementary science education methods course and a science field experience." Journal of Elementary Science Education 21, no. 4 (2009): 1-22.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03182354
  39. Vasconcelos, Lucas, and ChanMin Kim. “Preparing Preservice Teachers to Use Block-Based Coding in Scientific Modeling Lessons.” Instructional science 48, no. 6 (2020): 765–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09527-0
  40. Vogels, Emily A. "Some digital divides persist between rural, urban and suburban America." Pew Research Center, August 19 (2021). https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/19/some-digital-divides-persist-between-rural-urban-and-suburban-america/
  41. Yip, Wing Yan Valerie. “Developing Undergraduate Student Teachers’ Competence in Integrative STEM Teaching.” Frontiers in education (Lausanne) 5 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00044
  42. “Why Technology Is Essential to a 21st Century Education?” Knowing Technologies, 28 Jan. 2021, https://knowingtechnologies.com/21st-century-education-technology/
  43. Women’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor. “Percentage of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) workers who are women.” Tableau Software. 2019. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/wb/data/occupations-stem
  44. Zilberman, Alan, and Lindsey Ice. "Why computer occupations are behind strong STEM employment growth in the 2019–29 decade." Computer 4, no. 5,164.6 (2021): 11-5. https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-10/why-computer-occupations-are-behind-strong-stem-employment-growth.htm
DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions published herein are solely attributed to the author and not necessarily endorsed or adopted by the Journal of Science Policy and Governance. Articles are distributed in compliance with copyright and trademark agreements.

ISSN 2372-2193
© 2022 Journal of Science Policy & Governance, Inc. All rights reserved. The opinions, findings and conclusions from JSPG publications, additional article commentaries and related events do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal.