Reviewed by: STEM the Tide: Reforming Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education in America by David E. Drew Frances K. Stage and Phyllis H. Schulz STEM the Tide: Reforming Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education in America. David E. Drew. 2011. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 264 pp. Hardback ISBN: 978-1-421-40094-5 ($35.00). Once again, David Drew, with STEM the Tide: Reforming Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education in America, takes on traditional notions about education particularly in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. His previous book, Aptitude Revisited: Rethinking Math and Science Education for America’s Next Century (1996), tackled the supply problem of mathematicians and scientists in the United States. Therein, he laid out the problems of rampant mathematic and scientific illiteracy in the U.S. and repercussions for technological and economic competitiveness worldwide. The earlier book focused on solutions related to raising expectations and developing students’ self-concept and self-esteem. Drew closed the book by making the case for curricular reform that emphasized talent development rather than education limited by judgments of aptitude. Now, Drew provides a package that cogently and convincingly provides cause for concern about America’s current status with regard to STEM education. He focuses on the last half-century and ends with America’s status, measured through student achievement levels, as mediocre at best. Relying on measures focused on individuals ranging from elementary school students to 65-year-olds, Drew bolsters his arguments with data from multiple sources: Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS); Progress in International Literacy Study (PIRLS); and the Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey (ALL). Drew acknowledges that U.S. performance has improved slightly for high school students in both mathematics and science and that American students perform well on advanced analytical reasoning. And while the U.S. has high percentages of 18-year-olds in school, low percentages of them study advanced mathematics and science; more remains to be done. The first chapters present a case for “our quiet crisis.” Drew contends that the U.S. failure to emphasize broader education in math and science negatively impacts its place within the global market. Often students have misapprehensions about what predicts success in STEM fields. Additionally, narrow definitions of intelligence result in the exclusion of women, underrepresented minorities, and low SES students from higher-level STEM education, limit innovation, and lead to a smaller and less diverse workforce. [End Page 897] Beyond presenting arguments for concern about America’s achievement levels, Drew presents an eight-point, research-based solution for closing America’s achievement gaps: leadership, evaluation, better teachers, high expectations, committed mentors and role models, the valuing of college education, working to close achievement gaps, and revitalizing university research. In contrast to his first book, he does not make an argument for changes to curriculum. Instead, Drew emphasizes good teaching, noting much effort, time, and money have been devoted to curriculum to limited effect. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 tackle the structural components necessary for high student achievement–effective leadership coupled with careful evaluation and high quality teachers and mentors who expect high levels of performance. Leaders must articulate measurable goals and hold students and teachers to high standards while teachers must make learning for all students a priority. Drew argues that STEM attrition is linked to the low value currently placed on teaching and mentoring in higher education, and this view is corroborated by recent scholarship (Lundy-Wagner, in press; Perna, Lundy-Wagner, Drezner, Gasman, Yoon, Bose, & Gary, 2009). In Chapter 6, Drew focuses on work that has addressed the achievement gap between socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged students at each level of education. Citing the success of programs at various institutions, he argues that student achievement in STEM programs may be associated more with positive college experiences and expectations than ability (cf. Perna et al., 2009). Chapter 7 includes a lengthy discussion of one state’s attempts to increase college attendance, namely by founding a new college in 2004. This chapter could be replaced with a broader, more informative chapter including the...
Read full abstract
Dec 17, 2021
Takashi Yamashita + 2
Open Access
