The scientific dark age of George Bush
University of Washington computer science professor Ed Lazowska, a onetime Bush appointee, says scientific research and education are sputtering in the "dark time" of the Bush years. He also says Washington state's higher ed system is failing the next generation.
While researching my story on Sputnik's impact on Seattle, I e-mailed Ed Lazowska, who holds the Bill and Melinda Gates chair in computer science and engineering at the University of Washington. Lazowska is also an investor in Crosscut. I was interested in his thoughts on how Sputnik influenced scientific research and education. And I wondered if the popularization of science was more difficult since the current White House is so widely regarded as "anti-science."
Lazowska is in a position to have an informed opinion, having been appointed by Bush as co-chair of the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee. I thought it was worth quoting his reply at length:
Here are a few quick observations ...
It's universally acknowledged that America's research-intensive universities – public and private – continue to be the envy of the world. This university system is a creature of two occurences of the early 1950s: Vannevar Bush's argument for public investment in research, and the public interest in science generated by Sputnik.
What's unique about the American university system is the way that education, research, and technology transfer are seamlessly intertwined. If you look at my field, computer science, essentially every billion-dollar sub-industry bears the stamp of this. And it's important to note that for all the talk about tech transfer, it's people transfer – the graduation of great students – that's the most important product of universities.
The years of the [George W.] Bush administration have been a black time for science in this nation. I speak with the experience of having co-chaired the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee for Bush, and having chaired the Defense Department's DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] Information Science and Technology Study Group during his presidency. Funds for research, the seed corn of our future competitiveness, have decreased. And the balance of those funds has shifted from longer-range topics – the natural role of the federal government – to shorter-range topics. In the Defense Department, excessive classification of research programs, restrictions on the participation of foreign nationals, and other policy shifts have caused university researchers to abandon working with DoD, meaning that many of the nation's best minds are not focused on defense-related problems.
Note that DoD funded the research that led to the Internet during the Vietnam war – it is not that we are in a war that is the issue! Presidential scientific advisory committees have been politicized. I have seen this firsthand. The general denigration of science emanating from the White House, and the near completee failure of the President's Science Advisor, Jack Marburger, to speak out, is poisonous. Right here in Seattle, consider the Discovery Institute and its "intelligent design." ("Faith-based science" is not what made this nation the world's leader.) Think about our immigration policy. This nation became the world's leader by welcoming the best and the brightest from all nations, but today we have a devil of a time getting foreign students into UW, or hiring faculty who are foreign nationals; foreign students who are educated here are "sent back where they came from" upon graduation rather than being retained to grow the technological base of our nation.
Obviously, there is a huge pipeline issue. Eighty-five percent of our undergraduates in UW computer science and engineering are from Washington state, and they are mind-blowingly good. But that's only about 150 students a year. Kids, by and large, don't come out of K-12 prepared or inspired to pursue careers in science and engineering. Take a guess – what's the fastest growing undergraduate major in the U.S. today? "Parks, recreation, and leisure" – preparing people for the booming Alaska tour-boat industry. At the higher-ed level, did you know that Washington ranks 49th among the 50 states in the participation rate in public bachelor's education? God bless Mississippi! At the same time, we rank fifth in community college participation rate. Our higher education system is oriented toward a manufacturing economy.
What parents need to understand, in their role as parents and in their role as voters, is that it's our kids who suffer. The great jobs being created in this state involve the creation of intellectual property – software, telecommunications, biomedicine, law, articles in Crosscut. Our kids, though, are not afforded the opportunity to prepare themselves to be first-class participants in this new economy. The K-12 system is failing them (we have to stop kidding ourselves about how Washington's K-12 system stacks up against our peer states), and our higher-ed system is failing them (due to lack of capacity at the bachelor's and graduate level, rather than quality issues, for the most part).
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Mon, Oct 8, 9:34 a.m. inappropriate
BREAKING NEWS: Wow. It's not every day that a prominent academic bravely castigates President Bush and, lest we forget, decries the lack of federal funds for his particular interest.
I've been counting and that happens every other day.
Posted Mon, Oct 8, 1:23 p.m. inappropriate
Have your "first-class.": While I agree that the quality of education is on the decline, Mr. Lazowska opinions reflect the elitist thinking that permeates Seattle's social, political and economic upper-crust. His conception of "first-class" participants and "great jobs" do not reflect the realities the average person confronts, and it seems unrealistic to expect the education system to prepare the bulk of the working force for jobs in the fields he mentions.
Further, it appears Mr. Lazowska misreads current trends. The "new economy" he extols was brought about by several decades of relative international stability, a reduction of trade barriers, and a glut of cheap oil. Those conditions are changing, and there is ample reason to expect those changes to continue for some time into the future, if not indefinitely.
America is seen as financial burden, a contributor to instability, and the dollar increasingly risky. There has been a rise in region trading blocks and bi-lateral trade agreements at the expense of global trading arrangements (see Doha round). More importantly, energy demand has exceeded supplies for several years, and production has plateaued despite higher prices, contributing to increased transportation costs.
All of this reflects an environment favorable to local, small-scale, low-cost manufacturing. Further, small-scale, organic agriculture seems like a excellent bet. Transportation and Energy Sectors will inevitably be vital.
I realize it doesn't reflect the consensus view amongst the Region's mover's and shaker's, and it certainly doesn't adhere to the current fad of blaming Bush for everything, but then the public discourse rarely reflects the realities faced by the average person.
Posted Mon, Oct 8, 5:04 p.m. inappropriate
Bush has spent more money on education than any politician in recent memory: This piece is a joke.
Posted Tue, Oct 9, 2:45 p.m. inappropriate
RE: BREAKING NEWS: This isn't just any prominent academic....um, this is a "Bush appointee" academic. You don't see those every day. Just sayin'.
Posted Tue, Oct 9, 3:17 p.m. inappropriate
First paragraphs are telling...: The professor's UW website seems to indicate that he teaches exactly ONE undergraduate course and that appears to be one of the UW's famous 300 student introductory classes.
"Research and Development" University's are part and parcel of the dismal state of higher education because you can be damn sure that what is researched and developed has little if anything to do with actually educating students and much more to do with rewarding corporate and government grants and advancing the cause of professorial tenure.
Posted Wed, Oct 10, 6:20 a.m. inappropriate
RE: Bush has spent more money on education than any politician in recent memory: This piece is not a joke, and the replies are especially telling. The thing is, you cannot simply dump money on something and expect it to be wonderful if your policies for spending that money are complete crap. The current administration of the United States has, as the article mentions, politicized the teaching of science. While the article concentrates at the university level, it could easily have included the high school level. When your administration is patently anti-science from actively trying to muddle facts and policy on global climate change to putting more stock in the bible than scientific data, dumping a lot of money at education isn't the answer. You'll just end up with a bunch of flashy schools and comfortable, but still sub-par, graduates.
Posted Wed, Oct 10, 3:03 p.m. inappropriate
'smarty pants': How bad is bad in K-12? My 13 year old, 7th grade grandson was called 'Mr. Smarty Pants' by his math science teacher. He's new to the Seattle School District and this episode occured on his second day of class. This bright, easy going guy, shrugged the episode off...but the teacher wasn't joking.
This teacher sure doesn't want to inspire and educate students to be 'first class participants' in the new economy.
Oh yeah...he plays a good game of soccer...now there's a thought.
Posted Fri, Oct 12, 8:08 p.m. inappropriate
More ways which George W. Bush is harming America: Great article showing how the Bush Administration's anti-science policies are harming America. Lazowska nails the key points, which many have discussed, but the mainstream media rarely talks about. I appreciate Berger quoting Lazowska at length, and letting him speak for himself, rather than paraphrasing.
The lack of investment in science just doesn't hurt the elites, as math and/or science are increasingly needed for jobs in medicine, information technology, many types of manufacturing, construction, ship and boat building, etc. Bush has promoted investing in friends of the Republican party ranging from Blackwater to Michael Brown, but he is hesitant to invest to benefit America. Bush's policies are great for other countries, as they are becoming the leaders in wireless and other technologies, but it's awful for most citizens of this nation.
Posted Fri, Oct 12, 10:32 p.m. inappropriate
UW & Big Science: Science takes place in a political context. If UW scientists are surprised by that, maybe they ought to check out science studies up on the Arts Quad. The Comp Sci prof (and Knute) might also learn that not all "research" on the big campus is "science". How arrogant.
And if you don't like the large lectures at UW-- put some damn money into higher ed for paying for more teachers, Otter. Otherwise, you get what you (don't) pay for.
Posted Sun, Oct 14, 10:19 a.m. inappropriate
The k-12 Education Dark Age of Dr. Bergeson: To improve a system usually requires the intelligent application of relevant data.
Despite large expenditures for WASL testing and the end of cheap standardized IOWA tests in 2005, OSPI apparently learned nothing to bring about improvement in mathematics. In August of 2006 Dr. Bergeson announced the State-Wide Math System Meltdown. How could this have occurred if OSPI was continually fine tuning a system through the use of testing at least 10 times more expensive than the IOWA tests?
The answer is OSPI was blindly adhering to a defective philosophy rather than using a scientific approach. Despite the recommendations from Strategic Teaching the State Board of Education's $150,000 consultant to significantly change what has been taking place in Washington mathematics, this is not going to happen unless there is significant public outrage.
Dr. Bergeson has now stacked the math standards re-write panel. We will be seeing more of the same. The first three days of panel meetings were unobservable by the public. These took place before who had been selected to the panel was even announced.
Dr. Bergeson's Dark Age will continue as she uses political power to trump science in pursuit of her own philosophical agenda.
The UW is largely a willing accomplice in this destruction as NSF funds and publishers profits are driving the destruction of our nations k-12 mathematics programs. The UW uses NSF grants to push these defective materials on the k-12 system. Dr. Bergson's OSPI produces a list of most aligned texts to the Washington Standards. The "Local Independent School Districts" then mindlessly follow these defective recommendations, because being an upper level district administrator is all about following and has nothing to do with thinking.
Yes as only 22% of recent high school graduates (data over the last four years) can test into college level math at Seattle Central Community College, while a full 50% can not place into a class above the equivalent of high school math 1, Seattle's Chief Academic Officer has recently selected more of the same.
The May 2007 k-5 Everyday Mathematics adoption took place in a process that was largely fraudulent ignoring large amounts of relevant data, while presenting only cherry-picked numbers.
How fraudulent? The school board meeting that this adoption took place at was not videoed. The .pdf file, in regard to this adoption that was posted for a very short time on the Seattle Schools website, is no longer available from SPS without a freedom of information act request.
If you would like it, then email me at:
dempsey_dan@yahoo.com
If you ever wish to see a total lack of scientific principles, watch a math or science textbook adoption in Seattle or look at most any of the mandates issued by CAO Ms. Carla Santorno.
The current public school mantra is all about "Data Driven" decision making.
The public never gets to see the data - but is supposed to mindlessly follow the decision.
In reading testing in Washington from 1999-2005 both the Iowa tests and the WASL were given. At grades 3, 6, and 9 the Iowa tests were virtually constant. While the WASL reading tests showed large improvements at grades 4. 7. & 10.
The WASL is an expensive public relations tool that benefits Dr. Bergeson, except in math and science.
Posted Mon, Oct 15, 5:26 p.m. inappropriate
RE: UW & Big Science: The phenomena I cited is endemic to all US colleges and Universities and the thought that you throw more money at the problem rather than simply require your high paid, do-nothing staff to teach more than one class a year is just as endemic and typical.
The UW main campus turns away hundreds of Washington state students every year and forces them into educational ghettos like the Bothell campus just so those on the cocktail, fast track tenure circuit can suck at the teats of big business and government grants while their English as a third language grad students teach the one yearly undergrad course they deign to offer.
Lovely.
Posted Thu, Oct 18, 4:24 p.m. inappropriate
Computer Science, the UW, K12, Online Learning, and Funding: Lazowska has analyzed the data properly, but his older funding algorithms are failing him. Fortunately, they inadvertently point towards a better way of funding an educational operating system. The old system is the defense model of a military-educational complex from which generally useful technology is accidentally spun off for "civilian" uses. This military pork system is now wholly politicized and has a farcical lack of funding oversight so that bacon can be distributed equitably to all states, congressional districts and universities. This old system lacks memory management and thrashes horribly, producing mainly waste, a bit of national defense, and crumbs for Computer Science departments everywhere. Long-range research should be done and funded without this overwhelming military bias.
Lazowska also decries the lack of retention of foreign-born computer science graduates who are forced to return to their homelands due to a homeland security-induced tightness on visas. I see this as an unintended good both for the nations whom we've robbed of their best and brightest, and for Washington State because it causes the UW to focus on doing a much better job of local education and to focus less on recruiting talent from other regions.
The UW is that it should primarily be the crown on top of our K-12 system. From this perspective, the current small number of undergraduates enrolled--relative to population--is a horrible disgrace. For a region whose economy depends on the technology-driven aerospace and software industries, the number of computer science graduates (only 150 kids a year!) and other math & science-related graduates is a key indicator of the productivity of the State's educational system. Unfortunately, the UW seems to mainly be about 1) research and 2) a losing football team.
Computer Science is a practical science that can have tremendously positive impact on one's life and on society in general. In addition to graduating brilliant CSci majors, the Computer Science department should open up it's programs so that the UW and the population at large can benefit from the knowledge it has to offer. It should strive to have 10 times as many graduates annually, and to offer 100 times as many undergraduate and interdisciplinary hours of instruction.
Furthermore, the Computer Science department, in my view, has a huge moral responsibility to integrate computer science into the K-12 curriculum -- subsuming our math and WASL requirements if need be -- to create a population of computer-science literate individuals who are math & CSci-adept and able to apply basic computer science to other fields of knowledge.
In the land of Microsoft (and Amazon and now Google and Yahoo), the CSci Department's investment in online learning technology should be massive, and its offerings should be state-of-the-art. That's the obvious way to blaze trails in educating the young who later funnel into our university system. It makes intuitive sense that the UW should be offering complementary online educational opportunities for computer science and math at all levels of the K-12 system.
But where should the funding come from? How about a Proposition 2: Online Learning & Science. Over fifty years we'd issue bonds and levy taxes to the tune of $50 billion to develop facilities and programs to facilitate this transformation of education from K12 through the undergraduate level . Most of this money would come from head taxes on high-tech companies, thus investing in the children of today's high tech heroes by taxing those heroes for the education that they received long ago.
Note that this $50 billion investment is roughly equivalent to the the $48B Prop 1 RAT Roads & Transit proposal. For me and many others, a dollar spent on schools is worth 10 spent on light rail. Let's put THAT to a vote.