Executive Summary
Investing in Human Potential: Science
and Engineering at the Crossroads
While much of the spotlight of educational reform has been on K-12 science
and mathematics education, it is clear that the objective of expanding
the base of participation in science, mathematics and engineering can only
be achieved by extending the reform efforts to the nation's colleges and
universities. This study examined the efforts made by U.S. higher education
institutions to increase the participation of women, non-Asian minorities,
and people with physical disabilities in science and engineering. Through
surveys of the presidents/chancellors of 276 colleges and universities,
the directors of nearly 400 recruitment/retention programs, and of nearly
100 disabled student services offices established by those colleges and
universities, intensive case studies of a smaller set of institutions,
information concerning the goals and methods of programs, and the policies
and practices of the institutions were obtained and analyzed. Findings
and recommendations for programs targeted at women and minorities, services
targeted at people with physical disabilities, and institutional policies
and practices are summarized below.
Looking Past the Crossroads: The Future of Intervention
Most of the interventions devised by colleges and universities are aimed
at enabling students and/or faculty from underrepresented groups to fit
into, adjust to, or negotiate the existing system. There is little challenge
to the structures that currently exist. A coherent, coordinated, articulated
structural approach to enabling students from underrepresented groups to
succeed in science, mathematics, and engineering programs has yet to be
achieved by the institutions. Within the special project structure, which
is the most common intervention strategy, we find that these models support
enhanced learning for all students, not only for the underrepresented students
for whom they may have been originally designed. Perhaps programs for women,
minorities, and students with disabilities can once again point the way
toward structured reform within science, mathematics, and engineering programs
that can provide excellent education for everyone.
Based on project descriptions and case studies, a model for the evolution
of intervention programs was developed. This model includes five levels,
ranging from isolated projects or programs to structural reform. The intervention
efforts of most institutions was at the isolated projects level where program
and projects were not connected in any way and relied primarily on soft
money for support. In a few instances, institutions created centers for
the coordination of large parts of the process of recruiting, retaining,
tracking, and advancing students to graduate education (Level Four). Not
found among any of the institutions was a model of structural reform where
the structure of courses, pedagogical techniques, institutional climate,
and system for recruitment and retention co-existed with a supportive administrative
structure, that is, where the regular support of departments and programs
provided mechanisms to support the achievement of all students committed
to education in science and engineering. Only by moving from ancillary
activities aimed at helping students survive the current educational climate
to changing the climate in which the students are educated can we reach
the goal articulated by the President and the nation's governors of significantly
affecting the participation of women, minorities, people with disabilities,
and, indeed, all students in science, mathematics, and engineering.
|
