Four STEM Learning Policy Points for the Incoming Administration
By Sarah Dunifon
Originally Published on LinkedIn
Earlier this month, I had the honor of attending a STEM Learning Ecosystems Community of Practice Town Hall hosted by the Biden-Harris administration. Along with several hundred other STEM learning leaders from around the nation, I discussed policy ideas that the incoming administration should adopt on day one.
We were given these prompts:
1) What would you offer as actionable strategies for improving equity and access to STEM education and stronger STEM career pipelines in your communities?
2) What would you suggest the administration do to advance state, regional, and local STEM priorities and initiatives that improve lives and communities?
Some of the great ideas from my colleagues included technology lending libraries for low-income families, deeper collaboration between K-16 schools and industry to promote workforce readiness, and the use of public schools as community learning centers outside of normal school hours.
The conversations got me thinking about what my main policy points would be, if I had the chance to chat with the decision-makers. Here’s what I came up with.
What would you offer as actionable strategies for improving equity and access to STEM education and stronger STEM career pipelines in your communities?
1. Overhaul the culture and expectations of undergraduate STEM education to increase access for all learners
Coming from a perspective as former Associate Director for Women in Science and Engineering at Case Western Reserve University, I’ve done a lot of reading and thinking about the gender gap that remains in STEM disciplines (and is much worse for Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Indigenous women).
Along with a slew of other cultural and social influences (like microaggressions, imposter syndrome, and biases on who “belongs” in STEM), weed-out classes can be a major contributor to pushing women and other underrepresented groups out of STEM disciplines.
These classes disproportionately affect those who already feel out of place (read: women and minorities) in the space. I remember taking a finance course in my undergraduate education where the professor told us on the first day to “take a look to your left and take a look to your right. Of the three of you, only one will make it through the semester.” As an anthropology and international studies major, I thought “I don’t need this!” and promptly dropped the class.
Aside from weed-out class culture, we also see this effect in STEM disciplines which expect a certain level of background experience, even in their introductory courses. Take the field of computer science for example. Many “Intro to Computer Science” courses actually require a certain level of experience prior to participating. When you consider who may not have had those experiences before (due to lack of access to computer science education and extracurriculars or due to cultural influences), this certainly leaves some people out. Think about how our culture has depicted the “computer science guy” in the last few decades (anyone else picturing Bill Gates? Steve Wozniak?), it’s no wonder that more women and Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Indigenous students have not sought out - or had access to - these prior learning experiences. It simply wasn’t available to us, or didn’t seem “for” us.
But it’s not hopeless. Many universities and computer science education groups have figured out ways to better include all learners in their offerings.
Harvey Mudd College is a prime example of how to tweak computer science offerings to better appeal to and retain women in the discipline. In a world where only 18% of computer science graduates are women in the United States, Harvey Mudd has attained gender parity. How did they do it? One technique was to create true “introductory” courses - no experience required.
Ultimately, by adjusting the curriculum at the collegiate level, we can increase diversity in and access to STEM classes and career pipelines.
Okay so how do we make this happen?
Incentivize colleges and universities to assess their curriculum and programs, and make the proper changes to graduate more women and underrepresented groups. We could do that with a federal task force, or work through some of the existing programs which aim to increase diversity in STEM fields (such as Athena Swan or NSF INCLUDES).
2. More collaboration between K-12 education and collegiate programs to ensure students stay in the educational “pipeline”
We know that by middle school, kids are opting out of STEM. This often happens when they think that STEM isn’t “for” them, because of a perceived lack of skill in STEM subjects, a lack of understanding of how STEM is relevant to their lives, or a lack of role models that look like them in STEM disciplines. We need representation and relatable, exciting ways for kids to engage with STEM.
At the high school level, we need our kids properly prepared for going into STEM fields in college or industry. This might mean career exploration opportunities, where they can gain skills and understand the opportunities that exist in the workforce. Or, it might mean better alignment between high school and college curriculum, but - and this is important - in a way that does not leave some students out.
I’ll continue with the computer science example. Currently, computer science is an “opt-in” experience for many schools. While some states are requiring computer science in their secondary education, most students must “opt-in” to computer science by either taking an AP course or joining an extracurricular club in order to gain the skills that will equip them for their intro courses in college. This leaves out the students who are unable to take on those additional responsibilities, or who view the space as “not for them.”
Okay so what do we do?
Educators can embed relevant, real-world examples of STEM into formal and informal learning opportunities, talk about how you encounter STEM in your daily life, and highlight diverse STEM role models so that all students can see themselves represented. Administrators and policy makers can ensure that K-12 education syncs with collegiate education so that no one is left behind when they choose to pursue STEM, and consider how access and equity may vary between different groups of students and don’t penalize them for it!
What would you suggest the administration do to advance state, regional, and local STEM priorities and initiatives that improve lives and communities?
3. Increase the level of rigor and expectation for evaluation and assessment efforts, at the state level.
Currently, federal grant- and policy-making agencies have robust standards for ensuring their programs are implemented successfully and have the intended impacts on society. At a state-level, however, fewer of these standards exist and they vary widely.
Evaluation is a core component of any social or educational program. It allows for transparency and accountability, allows for people to learn more about their own program and how to implement it more effectively, and allows for others to learn from their experiences so that we can - as a whole - build upon what we know works.
Implementing statewide policies requiring grantmakers and program managers to include evaluation in their work would bring the quality of programs up across the board, and offer the necessary accountability, transparency, and sharing of best practices. Not only would this ensure the best use of our resources, but it’s just common sense and good practice.
Okay so how could we make this happen?
Encourage family foundations, state agencies, and others to see the value of evaluation and prioritize it as a necessary component of grantmaking and decision making. This could be incentivized nationally, or we might require state level representatives whose duty it is to ensure a high standard of evaluation is exercised on all initiatives.
4. Ensure students see themselves reflected in STEM role models, and ensure STEM role models are rewarded for their efforts.
We all know the classic saying - “you need to see it to be it” - and unfortunately our students just aren’t seeing themselves reflected in STEM role models. While some progress has been made in STEM representation (see this report on the classic Draw-a-Scientist study), many students still don’t have diverse STEM role models available to them.
One method for addressing this has been to find diverse STEM professionals, and ask them to participate in various programs as special guests, mentors, guest speakers, etc. This is seen quite often in the higher education space.
The current mentoring model in most of academia relies on professors mentoring and taking on additional advising roles out of the goodness of their hearts. While noble, this can actually work against their own best interests as it takes time and attention away from their teaching and research.
There simply is no tenure benefit to taking on these responsibilities. In other words, those who are already marginalized in academic STEM roles are asked to take on more of the “office housekeeping” to their own detriment.
Okay what do we do here?
Encourage greater participation in mentoring experiences for diverse STEM professionals (in both academia and industry) by incentivizing their participation. We require colleges, universities, and corporations to actively support and incentivize mentoring and representation opportunities for their employees.
Sarah M. Dunifon is Founder and Principal Evaluator of Improved Insights LLC, an educational evaluation firm focused on STEM and youth-based programming. She is based in Cleveland, Ohio.