U.S. science education. Lawmakers vie to shape NSF program.

Abstract

Congress abhors a vacuum. So this spring, after President Bush proposed a $200-million-a-year science and math education program to be run by the National Science Foundation (NSF) but offered scant details ( Science , 13 April, p. [182][1]), legislators jumped at the chance to influence one of the hottest political debates of the year. The result is a slew of bills that would flesh out Bush's sketchy plan to forge partnerships between university researchers and local school districts. Chances appear good that one or more of them will be adopted this year, although funding levels remain up in the air. Making the biggest splash is a plan introduced last week by the chair of the House Science Committee, Representative Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY). The National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act (HR 1858) would authorize $267 million a year in programs to strengthen teacher training and professional development. The bill would establish a new NSF grants program that would link universities and nonprofit organizations with local schools and businesses to improve math and science instruction in elementary and secondary schools. It would also provide scholarships for science and math majors or scientists wishing to become teachers, give teachers grants to do university-level research, and create four NSF-funded centers to study how children learn. “One of the failings of our current [public education] system is that we don't take advantage of all the expertise residing in our universities and businesses,” said Boehlert in a prepared statement. “My bill is an effort to do just that.” Slightly different versions of the Bush plan are embodied in HR 1 and S 1, the main Republican vehicles for the president's overall effort to rework federal support for elementary and secondary schools. However, those bills would funnel most of the partnership money to local and state school districts through the Department of Education. ![Figure][2] Partners aplenty. Representative Sherwood Boehlert's science and math education bill is one of many that address a new NSF program. CREDIT: RICK KOZAK Boehlert's bill avoids a controversial provision in a related education bill sponsored by Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) that would require NSF to fund the salaries of master teachers at private as well as public schools. Ehlers says he hopes to move ahead with his bill, HR 100, which suffered a surprise defeat last fall ( Science , 10 November 2000, p. [1068][3]). But other observers predict that some of Ehlers's provisions will be folded into the chair's bill. Boehlert also hopes to join forces with House Democrats, who earlier this month introduced a partnerships bill, HR 1693, that places a greater emphasis on increasing the participaton of underrepresented groups and boosting educational technologies. Boehlert's plan appears to be closely aligned with NSF's thinking on Bush's partnership program, which officials first learned about in late January. Judith Sunley, head of NSF's education directorate, expects to issue an announcement this fall on how the program will be run. “We hope that our legislation will influence what [NSF] decides to do,” says Boehlert aide David Goldston, who expects the bill to be marked up by the full committee next month. Whatever their differences, these bills simply give NSF permission to carry out specific programs. The money to run them comes from appropriators, who will shortly start carving up some $661 billion in discretionary spending for the 2002 fiscal year, which begins in October. Political trade-offs are likely to shape NSF's overall budget, currently $4.4 billion and scheduled for a 1.3% boost. Despite widespread support for improving precollege math and science education, for instance, the 11% increase Bush has proposed for NSF's education programs might be vulnerable. On 16 May a House spending panel discussed shifting some education money into the foundation's core research programs in order to offset cuts and putting a freeze on major research facilities, as called for by the president's April budget. Comparing those cuts to a requested 13.5% increase for the National Institutes of Health, appropriations subcommittee chair James Walsh (R-NY) said after the hearing that “we may need to put more money into the physical sciences” to improve the balance of federally funded research. [1]: /lookup/volpage/292/182 [2]: pending:yes [3]: /lookup/volpage/290/1068b