Low Marks for Education Funding Priorities

Abstract

Anyone involved substantively in science education during the past five decades will see the irony in the decision by the Office and Management and Budget (OMB) to trim the federal government's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs on the grounds that many of them lack evaluation data on efficacy (“An invisible hand behind plan to realign U.S. science education,” J. Mervis, News Focus, 26 July, p. [338][1]). Although federal funding often supported formative evaluation (assessment in the pilot phase to improve the program itself) during the development of new curricula, it was virtually impossible to secure funding for summative evaluation (assessment of effectiveness after implementation) because of the costs and time frames involved. At the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study ([ 1 ][2]), where the value of summative evaluation always has been self-evident, we often lamented that the federal government funded a series of 90-meter dashes, supporting development of new instructional materials but not their evaluation. Funding from the Institute for Education Sciences for efficacy trials ([ 2 ][3]) that provide one type of summative evaluation constitutes some progress, but it is not enough. It is perverse for OMB to blame STEM projects for deficiencies that were inherent in the government's funding priorities. Perhaps an evaluation of those priorities is in order. 1. [↵][4]Biological Sciences Curriculum Study ([www.bscs.org][5]). 2. [↵][6]1. J. K. Spybrook, 2. S. W. Raudenbush , Educ. Eval. Pol. Anal. 31, 298 (2009). [OpenUrl][7][CrossRef][8] [1]: pending:yes [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [5]: http://www.bscs.org [6]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [7]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DEduc.%2BEval.%2BPol.%2BAnal.%26rft.volume%253D31%26rft.spage%253D298%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.3102%252F0162373709339524%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [8]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3102/0162373709339524&link_type=DOI