Chemical Education Today
Editorial
A Report on Reports Last year, instead of its usual annual report on its own activities, Project Kaleidoscope released a summary of recommendations from 13 reports that have appeared over the past two decades (1). Subtitled Report on Reports, the Kaleidoscope document provides access to a great deal of wise and useful commentary on the education of undergraduates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in the U.S. and elsewhere. If you have not already read it, or the reports to which it refers, please take the time to do so. The reports differ widely in membership and experience of the group that created them, in the years when they were released (from 1986 through 2001), and in sponsorship (from government agencies, through scientific societies and national boards, to independent agencies of change such as Kaleidoscope itself ). Nevertheless, the reports have a common theme: There needs to be broad adoption in STEM disciplines of learning environments that •
Encourage investigation
•
Enable students to make connections with fields other than the one they are studying
•
Suggest practical applications related to students’ own experiences or goals
•
Involve communities where faculty and students are partners in learning
In addition government agencies, institutions of postsecondary education, faculty, and the general public need to resolve to make education in STEM disciplines a much higher priority and to cooperate and collaborate with a broad range of colleagues and organizations to improve it. Perhaps this commonality of theme is not so surprising, given that the reports were largely created by groups of individuals who had participated in changing their own local learning environments, who had experimented to see what worked and what did not, and who were eager to help others to do the same. The results of a broad range of such experiments clearly have led to a consensus about what should be done and how it can be done. Now we need to broaden the impact from those who are early adopters and very enthusiastic to many others who are directly involved in postsecondary STEM education but have not yet incorporated these themes into their individual educational activities. Considerable progress has already been made toward the goals listed above, and this can be seen in the changing recommendations over time. For example, the Neal Report in 1986 called on academic institutions to “Engage all faculty, including research faculty, in the instruction of undergraduates” (2). In 2000 the National Science and Technology Council called on federal agencies to “Enhance the dialog on integration of research and education” (3). In the interim
the National SciBefore you get caught up in ence Foundation and other granting the overwhelming nitty-gritty agencies have provided programs to of a new academic year, encourage inclusion of undergraduates take some time to reflect on in research and to require that funded the learning environment projects demonstrate broad impact in your classes last year and on society. On the other hand, some how you could improve recommendations remain nearly unit this year. changed. In 1986 the Neal Report encouraged academic institutions to “Build collaborations with other educational institutions, including K–12, and with industry.” In 1999 a National Research Council report, How People Learn, asked that we “Build local and global communities of teachers, administrators, parents, and others interested in learning” (4). Clearly we still have much to do. The beginning of a new school year is an excellent time to think about how undergraduate courses and programs can be strengthened and revitalized. Before you get caught up in the overwhelming nitty-gritty of a new academic year, take some time to reflect on the learning environment in your classes last year and how you could improve it this year. Kaleidoscope’s summary of nearly two decades of reports is a great place to start. I strongly encourage you to obtain it, read it, and, most importantly of all, act on it. Literature Cited 1. Narum, Jeanne L., Ed. Recommendations for Action in Support of Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics; Project Kaleidoscope: Washington, DC, 2002; http:// www.pkal.org/documents/ReportonReports.pdf (accessed Jul 2003). 2. Neal, Homer A., Chair, NSB Task Committee on Undergraduate Science and Engineering Education. Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education; National Science Foundation: Washington, DC, 1986 (NSB 86-100). 3. National Science and Technology Council. Ensuring a Strong U.S. Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Workforce in the 21st Century, April 2000; http://www.ostp.gov/html/workforcerpt.pdf (accessed Jul 2003). 4. Bransford, John D.; Brown, Ann L.; Cocking, Rodney R. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 1999; http://www.nap.edu/ catalog/6160.html (accessed Jul 2003).
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 80 No. 9 September 2003 • Journal of Chemical Education
975
