Search News


Browse Archives

News

Boost Proposed for Science Education

June 13, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

A House of Representatives subcommittee Thursday unanimously approved spending increases for agencies including the National Science Foundation and the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology, increasing their share over last year's amount and shifting some of their focus from research to education-related programs.

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies signed off on the $56.8 billion bill, which would fund the agencies under the panel's jurisdiction for the 2009 fiscal year. The markup amount is about $5 billion over last year's enacted funding level and more than $3.1 billion above President Bush's budget request for the year.

Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-W.V.), the subcommittee's chairman, said that the allocation provided to the subcommittee by the full Appropriations Committee permitted an increase in spending on climate change research and aeronautics, as well as other areas "in which the [president's] budget request was inadequate," he said.

A spokesman for Mollohan said that this year's bill is adjusting its funding priorities in certain areas.

"Under Chairman Mollohan’s leadership, the Subcommittee shifted about $50 million from research and related activities to an emphasis on education activities," the spokesman said in an e-mail. "The $50 million shift was made in recognition of America’s need for robust investments in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education. Specifically, these new investments are focused on Noyce Scholarships, math and science partnerships and climate change education grants."

The Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship program of the NSF enables colleges and universities to encourage math, science and engineering majors to become teachers in high-risk K-12 schools.

The subcommittee's bill would appropriate some $26 billion for science, technology and innovation spending -- the cornerstone of President Bush's American Competitiveness Initiative, which was enacted by the America COMPETES Act but hasn't yet been fully funded -- an increase of $1.7 billion over fiscal year 2008. The NSF would receive $6.9 billion, a 13 percent increase; the bill would provide $785 million for NIST, restoring proposed cuts to a technology enhancement program, Mollohan said at the markup session.

Further details on the subcommittee's bill probably will not be available until the full Appropriations Committee meets to draft its version of the bill next Thursday.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Boost Proposed for Science Education

  • NSF out of pedagogy
  • Posted by Ken D. on June 13, 2008 at 9:35am EDT
  • The NSF does more harm than good when it funds research on science and math teaching.

    The NSF should stay out of education.

    The fierce competition for NSF education grants at the big Education Schools in research universities induces young professors to turn their backs on tried and true teaching methods which have worked for centuries.

    The whole thing becomes a farce, as Professors shill out rehashed instructional theories to please their departments who avariciously yearn for their slice of the Federal pie. Students benefit not a wit and the taxpayers foot the bill, as the NSF funds a bunch of education hacks both within and outside of its walls, who in truth appear to know little about how to best teach science and math.

  • Shift of Focus??
  • Posted by Jim on June 13, 2008 at 10:00am EDT
  • “Under Chairman Mollohan’s leadership, the Subcommittee shifted about $50 million from research and related activities to an emphasis on education activities,” Please! This is less than 0.1 percent of the total budget of $56.8B -- hardly a newsworthy redirection of priorities. Surely, buried in that $56.8B there must have been a few significant new thrusts being funded. How about reporting those instead of the political fluff orchestrated by the committee chair?

  • To Ken D. (Or To Anyone Else Who Agrees With Him)
  • Posted by R.W. Hoyer on June 13, 2008 at 11:25am EDT
  • I would like to discuss the perspective you expressed in your post in greater detail (and in a manner not consistent with the IHE Comments objectives).

    With the promise that I will not compromise your anonymity, I would appreciate your sending me your e-mail address so I can write to you personally.

    By the way, have you read Paul Lockhart’s “A Mathematician’s Lament?”

    R.W. Hoyer
    rwhoyer@gmail.com

  • Sorry Ken D.
  • Posted by R.W. Hoyer on June 13, 2008 at 1:25pm EDT
  • rwhoyer@gmail.com

  • On that "Boost Proposed for Science Education" Nonsense
  • Posted by Jerald Caruthers , Professor/Physicist on June 17, 2008 at 8:30am EDT
  • More nonsense from and for Educationists on science. What we need is science taught, not Educationists' babble on science! Teach them what science is not, for example, "The distance to the sun is 90 million miles." But the problem is that Educationists do not know what science is, other than restating the "Scientific Method."