While every test has its critics, the OECD test, known as the “Program for International Student Assessment” (or PISA), is highly respected. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said of the results from the 2009 test, which showed results similar to those of the 2012 test, “We can quibble, or we can face the brutal truth that we’re being out-educated.”7 Secretary Duncan is right, but he could go further. We are being out-educated because we are simply not realizing our potential. We are a nation under-taught and under-educated. The fault is ours.
When it comes to our own scores at home, the news looks even worse. NAEP, as mentioned above, measures our students in a variety of subjects at different grade levels; it is administered to hundreds of thousands of students in America and is known as “the gold standard” of testing. Almost all education experts hold it in high regard.8 In the most recent assessment of fourth and eighth graders, released in 2013, we found that only thirty-four percent of our nation’s fourth graders were “proficient” at math—that is, they were at an achievement level one would think of as “competent” or higher—and seventeen percent were “below basic” in their mathematics abilities. In other words, almost one out of five fourth graders were failing math.9 By eighth grade, the numbers were even worse: twenty-seven percent of our nation’s eighth graders were performing at the proficient level while a full twenty-six percent were scoring below basic, or failing.10 By high school, as we saw above, the numbers were worse yet.11
Given all the resources we have at our disposal today, given all the money we pour into school systems (over $600 billon a year in America in elementary and secondary education funding alone) and into studies on how to educate, it is nothing short of tragic that a majority of our nation’s students score below a standard of competence, or proficient. Looking at the trend where fourth graders score better than eighth graders, who score better than twelfth graders, former U.S. Secretary of Education and Project Lead The Way (PLTW) Senior Advisor William J. Bennett observes: “The longer one stays in school in America, the worse one does.”12
When it comes to science education, we do dismally as well. In fourth grade, the latest NAEP scores (from 2009) show a thirty-four percent proficiency rate and a twenty-eight percent failure rate.13 In eighth grade, the most recent NAEP (from 2011) reveals thirty-two percent of our students scoring proficiently and thirty-five percent failing.14 And our twelfth graders? The most recent assessment for them (2009) shows a twenty-one percent proficiency rate and a full forty percent failure rate15—worse than they do in math and, still, an upside-down trajectory where the longer students stay in school, the worse they perform.
The state of our STEM education does not have to be this way, but more importantly, it cannot stay this way. The good news is, while there is rampant failure and mediocrity throughout our nation’s education system, there are great examples where this is simply not happening, where success is the norm. However, if America is going to remain the—or just a—leading nation, we must ignite a fierce urgency throughout our nation’s education system. We must move from pockets of excellence to a system of excellence.
To highlight the need for this fierce urgency, we only need go to the most recent White House report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (or PCAST). The President’s Council opened its February 2012 report stating, “Economic projections point to a need for approximately one million more STEM professionals than the U.S. will produce at the current rate over the next decade if the country is to retain its historical preeminence in science and technology. To meet this goal, the United States will need to increase the number of students who receive undergraduate STEM degrees by about thirty-four percent annually over current rates.”16 We are not on course to do this - not at the elementary, secondary, or post-secondary levels of education.
This is a challenging proposition given our students’ lack of interest and poor performance in science and math. A recent report suggested that about twenty-eight percent of high school freshmen (one million high school students) declare an interest in STEM-related fields each year, but some fifty-seven percent of them will lose interest over the course of their high school careers.17 We lose about 570,000 STEM-eager high school students each year by their senior year in high school. We are turning off over half a million brains to the fields of math and science in high school alone…every year!
And, nowhere near a majority of high school students are even competent in subjects like math and science, never mind advanced. Only three percent of our nation’s high school seniors score at an “advanced” level in math on the NAEP test,18 while only one percent of our nation’s high school seniors score at an “advanced” level in science.19 A portion of these are the students who most likely will go on to attain graduate degrees in those fields, attend the best colleges and universities in those fields, and ultimately go on to become leaders in their fields in academics, medicine, research, or industry. One recent report puts that portion at about seventeen percent!20
So, by the time we have high school seniors competent in science and math, and still interested in STEM fields and careers, we have a woefully inadequate pool or pipeline. Then they get to college. And there, less than forty percent of college students who enter college intent on a degree in the STEM fields stay on course and graduate with that STEM degree.21 We lose students’ interest in high school if we were fortunate enough to have encouraged those students in elementary and middle school in the first place; and then of those who stay interested, we lose a majority of them in college.
We simply cannot go on this way, not if the serious reports on the future needs of this country are to be taken seriously, and they should be. The current STEM workforce is about 7.4 million employees with an estimated 8.6 million employees needed by 2018.22 And that is just a minimum projection. America cannot win by simply maintaining the number of students who pursue STEM-related degrees; we need to inspire over one million more, and that is just to stay the course with the current economy. But, we are not on that trajectory. We are nowhere near it.
2
The American Economy of Today and Tomorrow—Still the Last Best Hope?
Abraham Lincoln famously declared the United States “the last, best hope of earth.” Other leaders have said much the same in the past. Ronald Reagan put his twist on it by calling us “the last, best hope of man on earth.”23 The Russian human rights hero and Nobel laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said, “The United States of America has long shown itself to be the most magnanimous, the most generous country in the world.”24 And in his time, the novelist Thomas Wolfe said America “is a fabulous country, the only fabulous country; it is the only place where miracles not only happen, but where they happen all the time.”25 I could go on and on with these kinds of quotes about American greatness. But what all the giants of leadership and letters were testifying to was not just our nation’s political philosophy, dedicated to liberty and equality as it was and is. They were speaking to the significance of the equal opportunity and freedom that had led us and the world, in their time and before, and could continue to lead us in the future. This notion of “best hope,” or greatness of national and international leadership, of exceptionalism, can only continue to apply and abide if America is to remain an economic powerhouse—if it continues to be a place of industry, financial strength, growth, employment, startups, innovation, and entrepreneurship.
But the fundamentals of our economy today are not strong; indeed, they bode serious trouble and concern. Let us take a look at the landscape of our recent recession and state of economic affairs. Most people over the age of fifty can remember the 1970s, or what is loosely referred to as the “Carter years,” as a time of economic hardship and failure. The standard line that then-governor Ronald Reagan used in talking about unemployment in his campaign against President Jimmy Carter in those years was: “A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Jimmy Carte
r loses his.”26 Ronald Reagan got a lot of mileage out of that line. But for as bad as our economy and the state of unemployment was in those years, the numbers are almost enviable when contrasted to today.27
The highest unemployment rate in the Carter years, the late 1970s, was 7.5 percent and by 1979 unemployment was in the five-percent-to-six-percent range.28 When the American economy went into free-fall in 2008—President George W. Bush’s last year in office—and the presidential campaign became so much about the economy, unemployment was heading toward seven percent again (after it had been in the four-percent- and five-percent-range for many of the previous years).29 When President Barack Obama took office in 2009, unemployment was already at 7.8 percent and would surge up to eight, nine, and then ten percent.30
When the “Recovery Summer” was declared by the Obama administration in 2010, unemployment was still over nine percent. Through the summer of 2013, America was showing the worst GDP growth rate for a full fifteen quarters since World War II.31 And today, with a rate still over six percent, many do not believe this is the real unemployment rate, given how many Americans are underemployed or have simply stopped looking for work. Some have argued the real unemployment rate may be as high as fourteen percent or greater.32 This is double the rate than when most Americans thought the economy was in terrible shape.
Other fundamentals today reveal an equally worrisome landscape. Our economic growth, measured in Gross Domestic Product (or GDP), stood at about 2.3 percent over the last few years.33 While that is better than no growth, or “negative growth,” it is still an anemic number. By contrast, in the 1950s, there were years with seven percent and eight percent growth; in the 1960s we had years with five percent and six percent growth, in the 1970s and 1980s, we had years with over five percent and sometimes seven percent growth, but now we are lucky to get up to 2.3 percent GDP growth.34 And, as recently as June of 2014, the Wall Street Journal had this headline: “U.S. Economy Shrinks by Most in Five Years.”35 Yes, with all the talk of “recovery,” indeed it truly runs weak to sporadic with one step forward and two steps back. To give a little more of an idea on how this is occurring, here’s more from the story:
Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced across the economy, fell at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 2.9% in the first quarter, the Commerce Department said in its third reading of the data Wednesday.
That was a sharp downward revision from the previous estimate that output fell at an annual rate of 1%. It also represented the fastest rate of decline since the recession, and was the largest drop recorded since the end of World War II that wasn’t part of a recession.36
Growth is what both encourages and indicates innovation and overall economic health. We simply are not healthy today. Indeed, we are, as of this writing, in the summer of 2014, just coming out of a first quarter contraction!37 I fear we may be forgetting what “healthy” looks and feels like.
This is all much more than troubling. Take a look at our average high school or college senior. Assuming high school or college graduation in the first place (which is a topic of concern I will address later): What are our seniors’ job prospects? What are his or her opportunities? While today’s student debt is at an all-time high, surpassing one trillion dollars, with many struggling to pay off that debt, many believe that number alone could constitute the next economic bubble to burst.38 But the outlook was discouraging for 2013 graduates. A Google scan of news headlines: “College Grads Overconfident in Job Prospects,”39 “Job Picture Looks Bleak for 2013 College Grads,”40 “The Class of 2013: Young Graduates Still Face Dim Job Prospects,”41 “Half of College Grads Can’t Find Full-time Work…”42 And these headlines came as the 2013 market was actually better than the 2012 market.
Where, however, is there a potential bright spot? According to a report by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, “employment areas with the greatest demand for this year’s graduates include business, engineering, computer sciences and accounting.”43 But this is only a potential bright spot because while there is demand, there is not supply:
A survey of 500 hiring managers by recruitment firm Adecco, found that a majority—66 percent—believe new college graduates are not prepared for the workforce after leaving college. Fifty-eight percent said they were not planning to hire entry-level graduates this year, and among those managers hiring, 69 percent said they plan to bring on only one or two candidates.
“Too many students are graduating with a weak background in science and math,” said Mauri Ditzler, president of Monmouth College.
“We need to make sure our graduates know the basics and many don’t.”44
Graduates do not know the basics in the areas where there is and will be actual job growth and demand. And those are the “graduates.” The drop-outs have an even poorer shot at the American dream, a sad commentary given that we have a forty-three percent college graduation rate in America, placing us eleventh among the OECD list of countries.45 As for high school graduation? One million high school students a year drop out, “a loss of 5,500 students for every day on the academic calendar.”46
There is a healthy, ongoing debate in our country about the actual economic worth of a college education, and many of my friends and colleagues have important and diverse views on the subject. But, three things are indisputable: 1) high school completion is simply not enough; 2) if you want to dramatically increase your options for gainful and sustainable employment—even in a down economy with bleak job prospects—the odds are heavily tilted toward those with a college or advanced degree; and, 3) the types of skills, knowledge, and degrees matter.
The odds are simply better with degrees in “business, engineering, computer sciences, and accounting,” or what many call or label “the hard sciences.” Even most of my friends who question the worth of college education do not question it in those fields or for those who go to top colleges. The entrepreneurial geniuses Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, who dropped out of college to create vast empires, are the rare exceptions. As William Bennett and David Wilezol stated in Is College Worth It?, “If you are accepted into the Colorado School of Mines, Harvey Mudd, Stanford, Plan II at the University of Texas, and dozens of other places…then go. And if you want to study petroleum engineering or any kind of engineering and have an aptitude for it, then go.”47
But therein lies the problem: aptitude. Not enough of our high school students are ready or even interested in post-secondary education like that. There is a reason, after all, that so many high tech companies and chambers of commerce want to expand the number of H1B visas granted every year in America. The H1B visa is the high-skilled non-immigrant work visa, especially common in the areas of engineering and math.48 So badly are these workers needed that one recent report found that “in the absence of green cards and H1B visa constraints in the 2003-07 period, roughly 182,000 foreign graduates of U.S. colleges and universities would likely have remained in the country and raised the gross domestic product (GDP) by roughly $13.6 billion.”49 By the way, the vast majority of the H1B visas go to students from Asia, mostly China and Korea—no great surprise given the numbers I presented in the opening of this book.50 More than half of the science and engineering graduates working in America today are from other countries.51
Of the nearly 1.8 million bachelor degrees awarded in America each year, only about one-third are in STEM-related fields, while a majority of China’s bachelor degrees and over sixty percent of Japan’s bachelor degrees are in those fields.52 “South Korea graduates more engineers than the United States…and in many Asian countries, 21 percent of college graduates are engineers, compared to 12 percent in Europe and 4.5 percent in the United States,” reported Charles Vest, president of the National Academy of Engineering and MIT president emeritus.53
I write “so badly are these workers needed,” above because of reports just like this one, showing that we simply are not raising our own graduates able to take these jobs and boost
our GDP. I support expanding the H1B visa program, but I do so knowing the tragedy of the decision: we do not train our own students well enough to take these jobs and raise our GDP. In other words, it is both a shame and a necessity that we have to import talent. I am, however, an optimist, supporting the expanded visa program on a temporary basis, because I firmly believe we can reverse course and, in fact, “grow our own.” Indeed, I know that if we are to remain the last best hope of earth, we have no other choice. We cannot survive on temporary and imported talent forever, we cannot consign our own citizens and children to average and less than average educations any longer, and certainly not at the same time other nations are beating us.
This is not just a matter of education for education’s sake or for the mere desire and preference that we employ our own citizens while unemployment is high instead of having to import from other countries the talent our own corporations need. No. This is about staying competitive in the global economy and not allowing any country to beat us as an economic and education engine or powerhouse. I am not an expert in international economics or in international relations, nor is this book focused on those topics, but it does not take such an expert to tell us that we need to be concerned about our own economy for our own sake, and that we need to be concerned about our competition.
I believe it is fair to say that the last several presidential administrations—both Republican and Democratic—have viewed China as an economic competitor and certainly a large portion of the world does as well. A recent Pew Global Attitudes survey found, for instance, that “53 percent in Britain said China is the leading economy, while 33 percent name the U.S. In Germany, 59 percent say China occupies the top place, while only 19 percent think the U.S is the global economic leader.”54 And here, in America? What do we think of ourselves? We are not so sure, but we are thinking less and less of ourselves compared to China: “Americans are divided, with 47 percent saying that China has or will replace the U.S. and 47 percent saying this will never happen. That is a significant shift of U.S. public opinion from 2008 when only 36 percent said China would become the top global power and 54 percent said China would never replace the U.S.”55
One Nation Under-Taught Page 2
