1. Issues in STEM 2 Education for Ohio Presented by: Walt Reiling, Jr. M.D. June 19, 2008

2. Basic Assumptions Clear global shift from a manufacturing economy to a technology based economy How well Ohio makes that transition will determine the economic prosperity (or lack thereof) in the decade to come!

3. Basic Assumptions cont. Ohio will need a significantly increased number of STEM 2 graduates to be competitive in the technology transformation. Ohio will require a significant increase in technology-related business and employment opportunities for STEM 2 graduates.

5. Source: GAO -06-702T pg 7 STEM 2 and Higher Education – GAO Report Post secondary enrollment has increased over the last decade (1994-2003), but the proportion of students obtaining STEM 2 has fallen. STEM 2 degrees 1994-95 519,000 (32%) 2003-05 578,000 (27%)

6. Source: International Herald Tribune, Saturday- Sunday May 17-18, 2008

8. STEM 2 and Higher Education – GAO Report cont.  Stem 2 employees and employment opportunities have increased over the last decade.  Mathematics and computer science showed the highest increases (estimated at 74%) while engineering employment did not increase significantly! Source: GAO -06-702T pg 13

9. STEM 2 and Higher Education – GAO Report cont. Since 1995 the U.S. has enjoyed the largest share of hi-tech manufacturing output….. BUT other nations investments in their own research infrastructure has doubled in the last decade median age of U.S. workforce is the highest ever, leading to a decreased growth. Will be flat by 2050. Women and minorities will be an increasingly significant segment of the workforce, yet they tend to be underrepresented in the STEM 2 disciplines.

10. STEM 2 and Higher Education – GAO Report cont. $2.8 billion 20programs Thirteen federal non-military agencies spent approximately $2.8 billion in fiscal year 2004 to fund over 20 programs designed to increase student enrollment in STEM 2 fields and employment in STEM 2 occupations. Sadly, less than half of those programs have been evaluated or have evaluation underway. Further coordination among STEM 2 education programs was mostly nonexistent.

11. STEM 2 and Higher Education – GAO Report cont. C ONCLUSION W E MUST KNOW HOW THE EXTENT TO WHICH EXISTING STEM 2 PROGRAMS TARGET THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND THE RIGHT AREAS AND MAKE THE BEST USE OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES !

12. Questions to Consider 1. Will a significant increase in STEM 2 graduates, in and of itself, stimulate the desired economic outcomes? 2. Are our STEM 2 initiatives properly targeted? How have we made an effort to access which disciplines are most needed and most likely to result in significant economic stimulation? At present the majority of initiatives are oriented to higher education. Is there reason to believe that a student’s STEM 2 orientation occurs much earlier, i.e. K-12?

13. Questions to Consider cont. 3. Do we have an adequate pool of teachers and educators in the STEM 2 disciplines? 4. Should K-12 teachers who have or acquire a minor, major, certification or graduate degree in a STEM 2 discipline be considered as STEM 2 graduates?

14. Questions to Consider cont. 5. Are Ohio’s STEM 2 programs being properly evaluated for effectiveness? 6. What, if any, coordination exists between Ohio’s STEM 2 initiatives?

15. Growth Opportunities

16. Questions???