ing the workshop) and eight project-related conference calls. Additional input was received from the report reviewers (listed on p. ix), whose task was to ensure that the report addresses the statement of task.

Content of the Report and Intended Audience

This report includes an executive summary, four chapters, and several appendixes. Chapter 2 provides a discussion of the arguments for and against developing content standards for engineering in K–12 education. In Chapter 3, the committee describes how current standards in other subjects may be leveraged to improve the quality and consistency of K–12 engineering education. Chapter 4 provides the committee’s conclusions and recommendations. Appendix A provides biographical information about committee members, Appendix B contains the commissioned papers, and Appendix C has the agenda for the July 2009 workshop.

This report should be of interest to a varied audience, including leaders in the K–12 STEM education community, STEM professional societies, policy makers at the state and federal levels, business and industry engaged in K–12 STEM education outreach, individuals and institutions responsible for teacher education and teacher professional development, and developers of curricula, assessments, and textbooks.

References

AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1989. Science for All Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.

AAAS. 1993. Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Project 2061. Washington, DC: AAAS.

Carnegie Corporation of New York. 2009. The Opportunity Equations: Transforming Mathematics and Science Education for Citizenship and the Global Economy. Institute for Advanced Study, Commission on Mathematics and Science Education. Available online at http://www.opportunityequation.org/TheOpportunityEquation.pdf. (January 26, 2010)

Chang, K. 2009. White House begins campaign to promote science and mathematics education. New York Times. November 23, 2009. Available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/science/24educ.html. (January 25, 2010)

DeBoer, G. 1991. A History of Ideas in Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.

DOEd (U.S. Department of Education). 2008. National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, 2007 (NCES 2008-022), Table 3. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65. (January 26, 2010)

DOEd. 2009. Race to the Top Fund Executive Summary. November 2009. Available online at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf. (January 25, 2010)

DOL (U.S. Department of Labor). 1991. What Work Requires of Schools—A SCANS Report for American 2000. Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Available online at http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf. (January 26, 2010)

Dugger, W.E. Jr. 2007. The status of technology education in the United States: A triennial report of the findings from the states. The Technology Teacher 67(1): 14–21.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement