In March 1998, supported by the National Science Foundation, a group of faculty, administrators, and students from two-year and four-year colleges convened in the nation’s capitol to discuss the role of two-year colleges in the preparation of teachers. Their goal was to develop a set of recommendations that would guide all those directly and indirectly involved with this critical activity. The report which resulted from their work, Investing in Tomorrow’s Teachers: The Integral Role of Two-Year Colleges in the Science and Mathematics Preparation of Teachers, helped improve the education of teachers for the next decade.
Once again, in November 2008, a select group of educators and professional society representatives gathered for a symposium at the National Science Foundation to examine the state of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teacher preparation at two-year colleges. The symposium highlighted the best of STEM teacher preparation programs, articulated the challenges that even successful programs face, and put forth a set of recommendations for colleges, professional organizations, policy makers, and society as a whole. The publication resulting from that symposium, The State of Affairs: Impact and Implications of STEM Teacher Education at Two-Year Colleges, can be found on the NACCTEP website by clicking here.
Comparing these two snapshots of STEM teacher preparation at two-year colleges, in 1998 and 2008, gives a sense of what has been accomplished, and what challenges still have yet to be overcome. Comparing the programs represented at the 2008 symposium to those in 1998, it is clear that they learned from and built upon the work of their earlier counterparts. The programs of the 2008 symposium were more nuanced, complex and agile, able to respond to changing mandates and shifting needs of students. Most of the programs had significant outreach and public visibility, extended beyond the borders of a single institution, encompass two-year and four-year partnerships, and sometimes reached the state level. In addition, the ways in which success was measured in these programs was more sophisticated than their earlier counterparts.
But it was also clear that many of the challenges of 1998 persisted in 2008. Programs still have trouble with students’ lack of preparation for college-level work, particularly in the STEM areas. Prospective elementary teachers continue to show a significant fear of STEM subjects, and to have little confidence in their ability to both learn and teach these subjects. Many two-year students have multiple demands of study, work, and family, which slow their progress in school and limit their ability to participate in support programs and enhancement activities. Changing state and federal requirements make building robust programs difficult, as local and transfer requirements continue to shift. And of course, the low status and pay of teachers in many places is an enormous impediment to the recruitment and retention of highly effective teachers.
While challenges remain, the projects highlighted in the report demonstrate that it is possible to create, run, and expand innovative and effective programs in STEM teacher preparation. The factors that lead to success are outlined, providing institutions seeking to create or improve such programs with a roadmap. And perhaps most importantly, the projects described in the report demonstrate that any two-year institution, regardless of size, location, or student demographics, can build a successful STEM teacher preparation program. |
