Creating Systemic and Sustainable Organizational Capacity for World-Class STEM Education The Leadership Challenge

Symposium Panelists James L. Gentilucci, Chair and Moderator, Associate Professor of Educational Leadership, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo Susan Hackwood, Executive Director of the California Council on Science and Technology and Professor of Electrical Engineering, University of California, Riverside Jay B. Labov, Senior Advisor for Education and Communications, Center for Education, National Research Council James E. Hamos, Program Director, Math and Science Partnerships, National Science Foundation George J. Petersen, Discussant, Co-director, UCEA Joint Center for the Superintendency and District Governance and Professor of Educational Leadership, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo Joan S. Bissell, Director, Teacher Education and Public School Programs, The California State University Susan L. Elrod, Associate Dean and Director, Center for Excellence in Science and Mathematics Education (CESaME), Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo

The Challenges “Our country appears to have lost sight of the importance of scientific literacy for our citizens, and it has become increasingly reliant on international students and workers to fuel our knowledge economy." “In 1970, the United States produced more than 50 percent of the world’s science and engineering doctorates. If current trends continue, by 2010 the U.S. will produce only about 15 percent of the world’s science and engineering PhDs.” “Eighty percent of K-5 teachers report spending less than 60 minutes each week on science, and 16% of teachers are spending no time at all on science.” It will not be possible for the United States to sustain a first-class economy with a second-class workforce.

Current Focus of Reform National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering sponsored a Convocation in April 2009 on Sustaining Effective Science Education Programs for Grades K-8 Four “Big Ideas” Emerged: 1. Mandate Instructional Time for Science in Grades K-8 2. Develop “Targeted” Professional Development for Teachers 3. Switch to National Science Standards and Assessment 4. Improve Public Perception of Science and Science Careers What’s Missing from this Picture?

Leaders: The Missing Piece

School Leaders Are Key Most STEM reform literature either ignores or only tangentially addresses the role of school leaders, devoting instead the lion’s share of attention to preparing highly qualified STEM teachers. This is problematic because superintendent and principal leadership have significant influence on the development and maintenance of systemic and sustainable instructional capacity within the organization. Efforts to reform STEM education have little chance of effecting long-term change without the leadership of site- and district-level administrators because they are organizational gatekeepers—what matters to them gets done.

Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

Findings from Proceedings 2009 Work to develop a shared vision of excellence in STEM education; Communicate through word and deed that science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education are curricular priorities for everyone in the organization; Advocate for political support (including resources) with school boards, parent groups, and community members; Model the value of STEM education for students by participating in laboratory experiences or by teaching a STEM course; Provide material resources (e.g., equipment, building space, money); Adapt daily schedules to accommodate hands-on laboratory time for students; Implement a program of targeted and ongoing teacher professional development to build STEM content and pedagogical expertise within the organization; Develop strategic partnerships with STEM-focused businesses and industries to bring knowledge, expertise, opportunities, and resources to the organization; Monitor, measure, and report program outcomes to ensure students receive maximum benefit from the capacity; Communicate, communicate, and communicate the successes of the program at every opportunity!

Creating Systemic and Sustainable Organizational Capacity Systemic capacity is a rich web of intellectual and material resources provided by school leaders to support bottom-up instructional improvement efforts. The development of systemic capacity is driven by strong leadership, clear and compelling vision, coherent policies and procedures, and cultural norms that focus on improving student learning. Sustainable capacity endures over time, its innovative features and resource supports do not disappear when people and politics change, and, most important, it becomes part of the cultural fabric of the organization. Both forms of capacity are necessary for meaningful STEM education reforms. We need nested leadership for lasting improvements.