Gender issues in physics

Physics lesson: according to a recent report by the Institute of Physics, nearly half of all mixed state schools have no girls studying A-level physics at all.

This issue will probably never be totally understood or resolved but it is good that we are reminded frequently. Use the blog's search engine and enter key words for more material.

"Why don’t more girls study physics?"

by

Jon Cartwright

March 17th, 2013

The Telegraph

The girls at Redland Green School have little enthusiasm for atoms, forces, energy and stuff. Unlike the boys. “I like physics,” says James, 16, a GCSE student. “It explains everything. It’s the way the universe works. It’s pretty much the entirety of existence. And it’s cool.”

Redland Green is a modern comprehensive, built six years ago in the heart of the affluent, liberal northern area of Bristol. Its physics teacher, Sarah Webb, is so enthusiastic about her subject that she has just completed a PhD in atmospheric spectroscopy on the side. And yet, like most other British schools, Redland Green is struggling with a basic physics question: why there are so few girls. Just 20 per cent of the pupils in its A-level physics class are girls – precisely the UK average.

That physics is a male-dominated subject will not come as a surprise. Together with chemistry and maths, physics is often associated with an abstract, oddly masculine type of cleverness. But chemistry and maths have outgrown this stereotype. Since the Eighties the proportion of girls in chemistry and maths at A-level has risen steadily, to the extent that the ratio of girls to boys is now roughly equal. (In chemistry it’s just under 50 per cent girls; in maths, about 40 per cent.) Not so in physics. According to a recent report by the Institute of Physics, nearly half of all mixed state schools have no girls studying A-level physics at all.

The trend is worrying from an egalitarian perspective. Physics is a facilitating subject that improves analytical and problem-solving skills, and those who go on to study physics at university can expect higher salaries than the average graduate. But there are economic concerns, too. Last year the Royal Academy of Engineering linked the “lack of women” to the estimated annual deficit of 10,000 science, technology, engineering and maths graduates required to keep UK industry ticking over.

The boys at Redland Green can explain the imbalance. “Boys are naturally adapted to be better at maths and space stuff, whereas girls are better at language and communication,” says one. “Which means – logically, according to science – boys should have a natural ability to understand physics a bit better.” His thesis provokes a murmur of unrest among the girls. Do they disagree? “I just think that — I dunno,” begins Molly, 15. “Girls are usually not doing physics not because they’re not good at it, but because they have other preferences to it. I think girls just find it more interesting to do other things.”
Molly echoes what a lot of girls say about physics – there’s too much maths, it’s not relevant to life, and, above all, it’s boring. Taken at face value, such comments make it easy to conclude that girls do not have a natural interest in the subject. But recent research suggests there might be an underlying deterrent: a lack of belonging. Girls just don’t feel at home with physics.

Take the following experiment, performed by physicist Amy Graves at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania. Four actors, two male and two female, play the role of physics professors for an unsuspecting class of 19-year-old students. The actors deliver identical videotaped lectures. After watching the videos, the students are asked to rate each lecturer’s performance.

When it comes to teaching, the ratings are unsurprising: the male students prefer the male lecturers, while the female students prefer the female lecturers. But when it comes to ability in the subject itself, stereotypes prevail. Male and female students think the male lecturers are more knowledgable, are better with equipment and have a better “grasp” of the subject. Graves’s study points to “confirmation bias”: students think men are better at physics because that confirms their preconceived ideas.

Few would blame them. The best-known living physicists are male, be they eminent theorists such as Stephen Hawking or popularisers such as Brian Cox. Although female physicists do appear on UK television and radio – the astrophysicist Lucie Green, for instance – none has become a household name. The imbalance is of course a reflection of reality: in academia women make up 15 per cent of physics staff in general and a little over five per cent of professors.

The lack of female role models has a profound effect on girls choosing A-levels, says sociologist Louise Archer at King’s College London. “For girls in particular, physics is seen as being a very masculine subject,” she says. “So the girls who like physics have to work a lot harder to balance it with that notion of normal femininity.”

Archer’s view is backed up by another US study. In 2010, a team led by neuroscientist Tiffany Ito at the University of Colorado split a class of undergraduate physics students into two sets. The researchers asked the first set to write for 15 minutes about cherished personal values – family relationships, creativity, politics and so on – and the other set to write about values that held no personal importance. Then they gave all the students a physics exam.

In the second set, the male students outperformed their female counterparts by an average score of about 10 per cent. In the first set, however, this performance gap disappeared. Why? The act of writing about cherished personal values is known to psychologists as “values affirmation”: a confidence-boosting process that counters the threat of stereotype.

Ito’s study, which is published in the journal Science, suggests girls could be welcomed into physics with routine values-affirmation exercises. More generally, it suggests that students perform better if they are encouraged to recognise the point of their efforts. Although all students benefit from such context, it is those for whom the subject is a less common choice – girls – who benefit the most.

At Colyton Grammar, a state-funded academy near Seaton in Devon, head of physics Peter Webber offers an example of how context can help. “If a student has an interest in medicine, you can teach them medical physics,” he says.

In the scheme of gender imbalance, Colyton Grammar is what physicists might call an anomalous point. This year 31 per cent of its physics A-level students are girls, and in recent years the proportion has been as high as 35 per cent – way better than average, even for a selective school. Partly, says Webber, this is a result of the intake: students travel from up to an hour away, which demonstrates their will to learn. But he says the above average girl-boy ratio might also stem from the school’s ethos, a “can do” attitude that rejects stereotype. In other words: don’t treat boys and girls differently, just encourage them both.

The message seems to have sunk in with Colyton students. Rowan, 15, says that in lessons she never even considers differences between boys and girls. Then she adds, to the amusement of her classmates: “You might as well not have genders, really.”

PBS...a kid's show with some science

One wonders sometimes just how much science is really offered with a PBS kid's program. It was initially somewhat difficult to choose but I settled on a PBS program called Fetch which is a blend of animation and live action. This series is in part sponsored by the National Science Foundation.

Wikipedia offers this synopsis:

FETCH! is a reality-based game show where young contestants take on various challenges to gain points. During these challenges, the contestants must complete a variety of tasks assigned to them ahead of time (and on the fly) by Ruff and surrogates, depending on the situation. There is also an educational component, as contestants often must learn something (i.e. Astronomy, Carpentry, Food Science, Biology, etc) in order to complete the task.

Not all contestants leave the studio each episode to complete tasks. As determined usually by the Fetch 3000, the contestants who remain behind in the studio participate in the "Half-Time Quiz Show", in which Ruff asks them questions based on the activities of the contestants out on challenges (see below). Once the contestants complete the activities in the field to the best of their abilities, they return to the studio and Ruff tallies their points. A prize is awarded to the contestant with the most points. At the end of the season, a final point tally is conducted, with the winner of the tally being declared winner of that season.

Prizes are not always desirable, and sometimes the prize holder winds up with a "booby prize"; in Good Dancing and Bad Teeth, Anna and Brian had to dance a waltz in the studio. During the first season the contestant had the choice of keeping the prize, or giving it to a fellow contestant. In Season 2 and 3, there are two unknown prizes from which the winner chooses one. Usually, the prize is "mailed" to the mailbox in Studio G, although occasionally large prizes are hidden elsewhere on the set. In one season two episode Rosario gave the prize to Nina.

Out on challenges, contestants have the potential to earn up to 100 points. The contestants in the studio have a chance to win a maximum of 50 points in the Half-Time Quiz Show in which they have to answer 10 questions about events during the challenges. Each question is worth 5 points. They have a total of 90 seconds (for Season 3 it was reduced to 60 seconds) to answer all the questions, as well as a time limit on each question. They can pass on the question and return to it if time permits. Usually, there is also a Fetch Fairness Guarantee, which states that every contestant will have had an equal number of challenges (usually 13) and quiz shows (usually 6) before the final episode. Additionally, there are between 5 and 10 "Bone-us" points (sometimes 15 or 20 points) available for one or two stand-out contestants. On rare occasions, such as an episode with a colonial theme, there is the possibility to earn more than 100 points (outside of any bonuses).

Now, the episode I viewed was rather cool dealing with two legendary places: Dogtopia and Catlantis in "The Mystery of Dogtopia and Catlantis". Ruff sends all the FETCHers to Misery Island to solve the mystery of what happened between dogs and cats in the lost civilization of Dogtopia and Catlantis. Okay, where's the science. Well, there were two: A lesson in the use of pulleys and electromagnetism. Now I am sure that they were scripted to find science solutions to two perplexing problems and coincidence provided the necessary tools. Nevertheless, here is the entire episode in three parts.

"The Mystery of Dogtopia and Catlantis"

June 5th, 2007

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3

American Chemical Society and an educational proposal

On February 2nd, 2009 at Rudy Baum's blog [American Chemical Society] the issue of "chemistry" education was addressed.

As parents and citizens, we all know how vitally important education is. As chemists and scientists, we are painfully aware of the multiple deficiencies that exist in science education in the U.S. at all levels. Those deficiencies have been documented in endless reports and quantified in the results of numerous international standardized tests that show American students falling behind much of the rest of the world in their understanding of fundamental science and mathematics concepts.

It remains difficult, however, to wrap one's mind around education issues, especially how to improve science education. Perhaps it's just because science is so broad and the issues confronting successful reform of science education are so intractable.

The American Chemical Society has been deeply involved in education issues throughout its history. Late last year, ACS formed a Board-Presidential Task Force on Education chaired by Richard N. Zare, who is chair of the chemistry department at Stanford University and one of the most innovative chemistry educators in the U.S.

The charter of the task force states that it is charged with "1) reviewing recommendations contained in national STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education reports released during the past five years; 2) identifying specific actions that the Society could undertake in response to these recommendations; and 3) creating a priority list of actionable items where the Society can have a unique impact on STEM education."

The task force's charge extends across all levels of education, from primary (starting at pre-K) through graduate and postgraduate programs, and includes continuing professional development and informal educational institutions such as museums. As a reflection of this broad focus, the task force has formed subcommittees for primary, secondary, and tertiary education and for outreach.

The charter states: "Solving the challenges the world faces in the 21st century will require synergy among new scientific knowledge, policy makers who understand its use, and a public that embraces the results. Education is by far the most critical ingredient for creating this synergy and needs to be a top priority for all nations and their component institutions. As the largest scientific society in the world, the American Chemical Society has a special opportunity and obligation to provide leadership in education that is both an end in itself and a model to encourage others to bring their perspectives and resources to the task."

I know that Zare has specific ideas about involving the ACS local sections and a large number of ACS members in a commitment to improving chemistry education at all levels. In sharing some of his still-forming ideas with me, he wrote, "I am determined to make sure that this task force does not generate another space-filling report that collects dust. There have been enough of them already."

Mary Kirchhoff, the director of the ACS Education Division, is the staff liaison to the task force. "The work of the task force can play a significant role in shaping the society's impact on science education for years to come," Kirchhoff says.

Zare and Kirchhoff are soliciting input from ACS members and the chemistry community in general. You can offer suggestions at educationtaskforce@acs.org. They note that you can have the most influence on the task force's deliberations by submitting your ideas before the spring ACS national meeting in Salt Lake City (March 22–26). "Concise suggestions with plans of implementation would be warmly welcomed," they add.

The ACS vision statement—"Improving people's lives through the transforming power of chemistry"—implies a focus outside the chemistry enterprise that I'm not sure ACS has yet to entirely embrace. The charter of the Board-Presidential Task Force on Education clearly charges the group with bringing the strengths of ACS to bear on transforming science education in the U.S. Please think about what the society can do to make this a reality and communicate your ideas to the task force.

His statement was followed by two responders:

Aaron Rowe wrote on February 2nd, 2009...

Here are my main suggestions for improving chemistry education:

1. Use more video in the classroom. It gets the students excited, and
can convey far more information than the best chalkboard lecture.
All teachers should be aware of the best chemistry videos on the web,
and ACS should curate a collection of educational web clips for
teachers. Teachers should not consider using video clips in class as
“taking the easy way out.”

Examples:
Top 10 Amazing Chemistry Videos
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/top-10-amazing.html
Periodic Table of Videos
http://www.periodicvideos.com/

2. Place a much larger emphasis on science news. Standardized tests
should include questions about major developments in the basic
sciences. Teachers should be encouraged to assign articles from
popular science magazines to their students. This will give the
students a sense of what sort of opportunities await them in the
workplace, will build their enthusiasm, and will put the concepts from
their curriculum into a better context.

3. Make use of adjunct high school science teachers. Create programs
to bring doctoral students, industry scientists, and seasoned chemists
into high school classrooms very regularly.

4. Design elective courses for students who love science, and promote
them in public schools. Focus on the entrepreneurial opportunities in chemistry. The class would cover current events in science, but it would also teach the students about unsolved scientific challenges, and how they could make money by starting a business to solve real world problems.

5. Create a program to encourage chemists to write books and make
video clips about science for K-12 students.

6. Teach students more about the salaries and lifestyles of chemists.
Everyone knows that doctors make a lot of money and spend at least
eight years at universities. Most kids are not aware of how much money
chemists make, or what their day to day lives are like, and that
uncertainty keeps them away from our profession.

And...

Lori Cox wrote on February 4th, 2009...

Any educational initiative to improve math and science education will have to involve parents, as well. For many, science and math are hard topics that were not approached in school in a way that is particularly relevant to “real life.” The math program at my son’s school is unique in that it contains a family newsletter to explain the topics being taught for that unit, partially as a refresher for parents, who may have forgotten those lessons from a long time ago. It is up to the teacher whether to use the newsletter, and I wish the teacher he now has sent them home. Science programs would benefit with such an outreach program.

All are good ideas but implementation is difficult. The appeal to teachers struck me the most. Now I realize that the following is highly localized and not necessarily representative of the whole system but it was enough to dampen efforts to become interested in the promotion of chemistry. Several years ago, I decided, as part of my household down sizing, to donate my life-long chemistry laboratory and related scientific equipment, including a library of about 300 books, to my highly-praised and well-accredited high school science department. I thought that this would be embraced and appreciated. I, after some difficulty, reached the head chemistry teacher. He said he would be by in a couple of days. So, I carefully spent a long time wrapping and boxing the delicate glassware and chemicals, labeling all boxes as to contents. Finally, the time arrived and the chemistry teacher made his presence. I was informed that he was in a hurry...he didn't want to be late for choir practice. Few words were exchanged and the whole transfer took about 30 minutes...and he was off. "Do, re, me" was paramount. Weeks went by...then three months--not a letter of evaluation or an appreciation note. Finally, a crappy "thank you" arrived on a piece of torn scrap paper with an evaluation of $3,000. I would have preferred to dump the chemistry down the drain, busted the glassware to be set out for BFI collection, and burned the books in the fireplace. I have discovered that things haven't changed much since then. So, the teacher approach may be questionable.

Aaron Rowe's comments are positive, good...and costly. Physical supplies cost money and educational systems are being strapped for funds and some school systems are simply down sizing science programs. It's not that students and teachers are not interested but is requires financial support that in many cases is just not there. Getting science authorities to visit schools and offer lectures are not going to be done for free and consideration of hiring speakers may just not be in the school's budget.

It's an uphill climb no matter what the perspective is.

Woes of Scottish science

James Watt
January 19th, 1736 to August 25th, 1819

"We can't let our kids give up on science"

Physicists, chemists and biologists, not professional pedagogues, should be the ones to shape Scotland's science curriculum

by

Joan McAlpine

September 14th, 2008

TIMESONLINE

The good news is we teach science better than England. The bad news is that England's performance is one of the worst in the developed world, so let's not rattle our test tubes in jubilation. Last week saw the world's most ambitious physics experiment conducted in Switzerland. It will test the theory of an Edinburgh University professor, Peter Higgs. But back home, we are not exactly reaching for the stars, or even those notorious black holes. Most school kids' knowledge of anti-matter comes from Doctor Who.

A report by the Royal Society last week into the state of the nation's science education found that 13% of 17- year-olds sat Scottish highers in biology and chemistry and 12% sat physics. This is much more than in the south. but it masks profound weaknesses. The recent Scottish survey of achievement — a snapshot of performance in a cross-section of schools — was shocking. Just 6% of pupils in primary seven achieve expected levels of science understanding — a figure that rises to just 17% in the second year of high school.

Sometimes it seems we have given up. The Home Office last week published a list of professions that we need filled by migrants. These included civil engineers, vets, speech therapists, maths and science teachers.

It is practical to plan for shortages. But we should also ask ourselves why we face such a brain drought. Our immigrant scientists are likely to come from India, where parents have dinner party conversations about their children's grades and their expectations of success are high. A survey conducted by Shell last week found Scottish children would rather be hairdressers than scientists. Just 5% of 9 to 14 year olds want to be a scientist, compared to 20% who want to be a footballer, 18% an actor, and 13% a hairdresser.

They had a poor understanding of what science actually is and where it could get you. Less than half realised you needed it to become a plastic surgeon. Children still think scientists are dome-headed boffins in labs.

It's little wonder. They learn almost nothing about Scotland's disproportionate achievements. Few children now celebrate James Watt's steam engine or Alexander Fleming's penicillin. They certainly would not know a Scotsman, James Clerk Maxwell, did as much for physics as Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton (chances are they’ve never heard of them either).

They will also be unaware that a Scottish company, Touch Bionics, has developed the world’s first bionic hand or that Europe's main testing centre for marine energy is in Orkney. It is unfashionable in Scotland to celebrate the achievements of great men. But we must provide kids with alternative role models and dreams for the future. Children with proactive families will do better. But pushy parents are unfairly maligned and thin on the ground. That leaves schools to raise expectations and spark imagination.

When the survey of achievement exposed poor performance earlier this year, it was suggested that few primary teachers had the confidence to teach science. While you need a good standard grade maths pass to work in Scottish primary schools, science is not obligatory. Nobody is suggesting we launch seven-year-olds on Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism. Fostering an interest in technology and the natural world, and exploring the basics of both, would be a start.

Most primary teachers are perfectly capable of this but there is no coherent, ambitious teaching programme for them to follow. There is no obligation to teach anything in Scottish schools other than religion and Gaelic in certain circumstances. It's very pick and mix. There is also open hostility among "experts" to fact-based education. Instead we have "projects" that cross subject areas. The emphasis is on learning processes — such as team work and individual initiative.

Educationalists believe "how children learn" is more important than what they learn. This is sensible up to a point — but like all theories it is damaging in the hands of zealots. There are some facts we need to know. A bias towards "creating confident learners" at the expense of real knowledge is worrying, particularly at secondary level. One consequence is the blurring of lines between subjects. In England many children in the upper years of secondary school study general sciences rather than individual subjects, which perhaps explains their appalling take up at A level.

Scotland was saved from this fate by the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Its devastating report into our new "Curriculum for Excellence" said science and maths guidelines focused on the "philosophy of science" at the expense of core principles. The education minister Fiona Hyslop immediately invited subject specialists to improve things. She should also consider paying maths and science teachers more than their colleagues and building on Jack McConnell's initiative to attract scientists from industry into schools. This means challenging vested interests.

Hyslop's plans for a science baccalaureate have been welcomed. But we need significant numbers sitting it to ensure future prosperity. Science education must be shaped, not by professional pedagogues, but by physicists, chemists and biologists. They must then tell parents and the public what was being taught and why. At the moment most people are excluded from the debate by the impenetrable jargon of elitist "educationalists". Despite the failings in our science education, it’s still easier for the average Scot to explain the purpose of the Hadron Collider than the Curriculum for Excellence.

"Flexbook"...free, open source physics text

Appears to be a good idea as long as they stick to the well-established basics and stay clear of specialized theories. Bias would then be a factor.

"Virginia Announces Physics 'Flexbook' Solicitation–Request for Collaboration calls for assistance in development of open source physics "Flexbook"–"

Press Release

Teaching science with Bayer's involvement

Maybe this is a good thing.

"Spreading The Joy Of Science"

Bayer's worldwide educational programs show students and the public the wonder of science

by

Sophie L. Rovner

July 21st, 2008

Chemical & Engineering News

Teaching science to a classroom of high school students or even younger pupils has got to be an intimidating prospect for some instructors, particularly those who haven’t had much science education themselves.

But teachers don't have to go it alone. They can tap into resources provided by numerous partners, including Bayer Corp., which was recently honored for its extensive science education efforts. On May 6, the National Science Board presented Bayer with the 2008 Public Service Award at a ceremony at the Department of State. NSB, which advises the President and Congress on science and engineering matters, presents the annual award to individuals or organizations that have increased public understanding of science and engineering.

In particular, NSB cited Bayer’s Making Science Make Sense (MSMS) program, which backs education reform efforts and offers training for teachers and hands-on experiments for students to improve science literacy throughout the U.S.

The award "honors the work and commitment of Bayer's more than 1,000 employees who volunteer their time and talents to ignite student interest in science and bring it alive in classrooms across the country," says company President and Chief Executive Officer Attila Molnar.

For the past 40 years, these volunteers have been visiting schools, science centers, zoos, museums, and community events, and even opening up their labs "to inspire and serve as important role models to today's students," the company notes in its literature.

Bayer’s volunteers also "give students an idea of who scientists are," says science-education enthusiast Mae C. Jemison, whose own résumé chronicles stints as a scientist, dancer, entrepreneur, and the National Aeronautics & Space Administration’s first female African American astronaut (C&EN, March 26, 2007, page 39).

Bayer backs these science education efforts for many reasons. "As a science-based company whose vitality and viability depend on a well-trained, well-educated workforce, we have long been committed to helping improve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, education in the U.S.," Molnar explains. "But our involvement also stems from something much larger than our own concerns. It is something that is embodied in Bayer's mission of 'Science for a Better Life,' a mission which holds as one of its key tenets that corporate social responsibility must benefit humankind and society at all levels."

Thus, the company notes, "MSMS not only helps educate the next generation of scientists, technologists, engineers, and mathematicians. It equips all students with the skills acquired from a high-quality, hands-on science education, such as critical thinking, creativity, and adapting to change—skills that in today's scientific and technological world are essential to any career one chooses."

THE EMPHASIS is "science literacy, not the next Nobel Laureate," says Jemison, who is the lead spokeswoman for Bayer’s science literacy campaign. "People who vote and members of Congress need to understand science." Molnar adds that the program is intended to develop skills that can be applied in "science-based decision-making."

Bayer Corp., which produces health care, crop science, and materials science products, is the U.S. subsidiary of Bayer AG, headquartered in Leverkusen, Germany. Internationally, Bayer supports STEM educational activities in dozens of countries in North America, Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa. In Germany, for example, the company has created BayLab facilities at several of its campuses where employee volunteers host schoolchildren and help them discover the principles of chemistry, biology, physics, and medicine through hands-on experiments.

Another program for high school and college students is called the Young Environmental Envoys. Founded in 1995 by Bayer and the United Nations Environment Program, the program brings students from 15 countries in Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Africa to Bayer’s headquarters in Germany for a weeklong study trip. There they learn firsthand about the principles and methods underlying modern environmental protection. Upon returning home, the students bring their newly gained knowledge and experience to their own local environmental protection networks.

In the U.S. alone, Bayer has deployed MSMS at 11 locations where the company has facilities. In the first six months of this year, the Bayer USA Foundation has awarded nearly $2 million in STEM education grants in these communities.

ONE OF THE first programs under the MSMS umbrella originated some 15 years ago, when Bayer gathered community and education leaders in Pittsburgh, its U.S. headquarters, to discuss how to improve science education in the local elementary schools. With their input, the company launched ASSET (Achieving Student Success through Excellence in Teaching) the following year. Bayer notes that ASSET and the other MSMS programs share five features that the National Science Resources Center identified as key to successful reform initiatives. NSRC is a science-education partnership between the National Academies and the Smithsonian Institution.

Hands-on experiments are one of the most important features of the program. "Kids' natural instinct is to try stuff," Jemison says. She adds that Bayer's surveys of students show that they "think that science is the coolest subject—whether they do well or not—as long as it is hands on." Bayer says that "with the hands-on, inquiry-centered curriculum, students learn science the way scientists do—by hypothesizing, observing, experimenting, keeping journals, problem solving, and working in teams."

Equally important for success is training that helps teachers transition from the traditional textbook-based method to the more inquiry-centered model that ASSET supports.

Bayer supplied most of the financial and human resources for ASSET’s initial rollout, though the program ultimately attracted $5 million in funding from the National Science Foundation. ASSET is now self-sustaining.

Since its introduction in two Pittsburgh-area school districts, ASSET has spread to 40 school districts in southwestern Pennsylvania. Some 1,800 teachers and 125,000 students use the program each year.

But ASSET isn’t just a local success. Bayer notes that Gov. Edward G. Rendell has backed the program with his initiative known as "Science: It's Elementary," and the Pennsylvania Legislature has approved millions in funding to roll it out in elementary schools across the state, "effectively turning ASSET into Pennsylvania's official state elementary science curriculum." Bayer offers programs similar to ASSET to school districts elsewhere in the U.S.

Assessment of students who use ASSET indicates that "they are outperforming their U.S. counterparts and achieving at the highest international levels, right alongside students from the very countries that consistently produce some of the best and brightest STEM talent, like Singapore, Korea, and Japan," according to Bayer. The program also helps shrink the gap in performance between white and minority students, the company says.

"All of this comes at a particularly critical moment for the U.S., if we are to heed a number of recent national reports that predict a growing shortfall of American scientists and engineers in the near future and that call for renewed efforts to bring more women and minorities...into STEM," the company notes.

Bayer has published two guides describing best practices for overcoming the diversity gap in science and engineering education. The publications are matter of fact about conditions in schools and proffer practical advice. For instance, one guide suggests that guidance counselors should be provided with information about STEM job options because they "often are not well informed about the countless career opportunities that exist for today's students." It also recommends that schools that lack modern lab equipment partner with nearby colleges or companies to gain access to better equipped labs.

Bayer hopes these publications, which include contact information for each of the listed programs, will stimulate other businesses to support such programs in their own communities.

Some education programs have already attracted multiple corporate backers. For instance, the Biotech Partners program, which was founded by Bayer and the city of Berkeley, Calif., has drawn the support of some 20 biotech companies in the area. The firms host local high school students for paid summer internships and host community college students for yearlong co-op jobs. The goal is to prepare students—particularly groups underrepresented in the sciences, including students of color, women, and those from low-income households—for positions in the bioscience and health care industries.

Helping these students succeed in school, Bayer notes, "often means addressing issues that are not necessarily academic in nature. These can include lack of self-motivation, child-care issues, housing instability, and family problems."

Specifically, Biotech Partners matches students with mentors who advocate on the students' behalf and coach them on overcoming barriers in their life and in the workplace. In addition, the program helps students purchase textbooks and select appropriate workplace attire.

Bayer notes that the program "is designed to build students' confidence in their ability to succeed in the world both academically and professionally."

Franklin Harris is one of those students. "When I was in the 10th grade, I never thought that I was going to make it out of high school," he says. "I did not think that I would be making a 3.7 grade point average my senior year. But the biotech program made me realize that I could do whatever I wanted to do—that the sky was really the limit," adds Harris, a 2007 graduate of Berkeley High School and the Biotech Partners Biotech Academy and currently in the Biotech Partners Community College/Co-op Job program. "They never doubted me and they never put me down or told me that I could not do it. ... Joining Biotech Partners was one of the best moves that I ever made."

Bayer reports that 97% of the students who complete at least one year of the program graduate from high school—far more than the 71% graduation rate for California as a whole.

Other endeavors listed in Bayer's reports on best practices include the American Chemical Society's Project SEED, which places economically disadvantaged high school students in labs for hands-on research in the summer. Students earn stipends for their work.

These educational programs have positive repercussions beyond the science curriculum. Stipends, for instance, raise students' self-esteem, Bayer notes. And students who participate in ASSET "also improve in subjects unrelated to science," Molnar says. Perhaps that’s because ASSET "requires students to think their way through the day," Jemison suggests.

Bayer has developed many other science education resources, including experiment guides for parents and children that show, for example, how to cook up a batch of plastic from vinegar and heavy cream, and two-minute audio clips that discuss topics such as why the wind blows and why porcupines have quills. The segments air on public radio stations around the country, and many are available on Bayer’s website.

THE COMPANY also sponsors an annual environmental film festival for high school students in Pittsburgh with its partners, Carnegie Science Center's SciTech Initiative and Pittsburgh Filmmakers. Students in this year's festival used a variety of approaches and styles, including Claymation, documentary, narrative, abstract, and television news broadcasts to tackle issues ranging from reducing one’s carbon footprint and reversing global warming to fostering alternative energy sources and green building practices.

Judged by an independent panel of film, science, and environmental experts, the students’ brief films were screened at a premiere red carpet movie event. Before an audience of hundreds, the young filmmakers competed for more than $11,000 in cash and other prizes for themselves and their schools. This year's grand prize winner was an action-adventure film that featured three young people battling out the pros and cons of alternative energy sources, including solar energy, wind energy, and nuclear energy. Think "The Matrix" meets "Harry Potter."

"Children really do want to do well," Jemison says. "If someone acknowledges they have the capacity to share important work, one way or another that creativity will come out."

Bayer is now branching out beyond school settings, Molnar says. The company is running a pilot project in the Pittsburgh airport, where it installed two interactive kiosks in the baggage claim area. The kiosks divert weary travelers with an interactive periodic table of the elements and with science questions from Bayer’s audio series. "Our hope is that the curiosity of visitors will be raised by these questions, as well as their science literacy quotient," Molnar says.

When the pilot project was being planned, Molnar figured it could be considered a success if 120 people per day tried to answer the questions. As it turned out, Molnar says, "we had three or four times that many people crowding these kiosks." Bayer says it is considering expansion of the program to other locations to "feed the public's interest in and appetite for science."

Leon Lederman...current state of science education

Leon Lederman

Leon Lederman is best known for his book The God Particle and here criticizes the state of science education in the U.S. In this ScienCentral video, he explains who's to blame and what it will take to make a change.

Leon Lederman