Enhancing Regional STEM Alliances

A 2011 report from the National Research Council, Successful K–12 STEM Education, identified characteristics of highly successful schools and programs. Key elements of effective STEM instruction included a rigorous and coherent curriculum, qualified and knowledgeable teachers, sufficient instructional time, assessment that supports instruction, and equal access to learning opportunities. What that report (which I led) did not say, however, was how to create highly effective schools and programs. A decade later, the National Academies’ 2021 Call to Action for Science Education: Building Opportunity for the Future helped answer that challenge.

In “Boost Opportunities for Science Learning With Regional Alliances” (Issues, Spring 2024), Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner elaborate on one of the key strategies for creating effective STEM learning opportunities. Regional STEM alliances—what the authors call “Alliances for STEM Opportunity”—can enhance learning conditions by increasing coordination among the different sectors with interests in STEM education, including K–12 and postsecondary schools, informal education, business and workforce development, research, and philanthropy.

Coordination is valuable because of the alignment it promotes. For example, aligning school experiences with workforce opportunities creates a better fit between schooling and jobs; aligning K–12 with postsecondary learning, including through dual enrollment, gives students a boost toward productive futures; and aligning research with practice means that research may actually make a difference for what happens in classrooms.

In calling for regional alliances, the authors are building on the recent expansion of education research-practice partnerships (RPPs), which are “long-term, mutually beneficial collaborations that promote the production and use of rigorous research about problems of practice.” In RPPs, research helps to strengthen practice because the investigations pursued are jointly determined and the findings are interpreted with a collaborative lens. The National Network of Education Research-Practice Partnerships now includes over 50 partnerships across the country. The Issues authors have expanded the partnership notion by embedding it in the full education ecosystem, including educational institutions, communities, and the workforce.

In these polarized times, alliances that surround STEM education are particularly important. Working together on mutual aims helps us find common ground instead of highlighting divisions. Allied activities help to build social capital, that is, relations of trust and shared expectations that serve as a resource to foster success. Regional alliances can help create both “bridging social capital,” in which members of different constituencies forge ties based on interdependent interests, and “bonding social capital,” in which connections among individuals within the same organizations are strengthened as they work together with outside groups. In these ways, regional alliances can help defuse the tensions that surround education so that educators can focus on the core work of teaching and learning.

While workforce development is a strong rationale for regional alliances, Singer, Schweingruber, and Brenner note that this is not their only goal. Effective STEM education is essential for all students, whatever their future trajectories. Once again reflecting the times we live in, young people need scientific literacy to understand the challenges and opportunities of daily life, whether in technology, health, nutrition, or the environment. Alliances for STEM Opportunity can promote a pathway to better living as much as an avenue to productive work.

Adam Gamoran

Building on the many salient points that Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner raise, I would like to emphasize the unique potential of community colleges to respond to the challenge of creating a robust twenty-first-century STEM workforce and science-literate citizenry. The authors rightfully point out how regional alliances can boost dual enrollment and improve the alignment of community college programs. And I applaud their mention of Valencia College in Orlando, Florida, an Aspen Institute College Excellence Prize-winning institution that many others could continue to learn from.

I would add that embracing the “community” dimensions of community colleges would accelerate the nation on the path to the authors’ goals. A growing set of regional collective impact initiatives ask colleges to be community-serving partners in efforts to build thriving places to live for young people and their families. An emphasis on alleviating student barriers, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has put pressure on these institutions to build out basic needs services (e.g., food supports, counseling, benefit navigation) for students and community members. Incidentally, I hope we don’t soon forget the thousands of lifesaving COVID shots delivered at these schools.

Many community colleges have mission statements that are community-oriented, such as Central Community College in Nebraska, whose mission is to maximize student and community success. Moreover, because students of color disproportionally enroll in community colleges, these institutions often play an outsize role in advancing racial equity, offering paths to upward mobility that must overcome longstanding structural barriers.

Despite these many roles, community colleges are judged—and funded—primarily based on enrollment and the academic success of their students. These measures miss key benefits that these colleges provide to communities and don’t encourage colleges to focus their efforts on community well-being, including the cultivation of science literacy.

Underneath this misalignment lies the opportunity. While open access schools typically can’t compete on traditional completion, earnings, and selectivity metrics that four-year colleges are often judged on, they can compete much better on community measures because their primary audience and dollars stay more local. By highlighting how valuable they truly are locally through regional alliances, these schools could secure more sustained public investment and support more students and community members in a virtuous cycle.

Additionally, emerging leaders of community colleges who have risen through the ranks during the student success movement of the past 20 years are eager for “next level” success measures to drive their institutions forward. Instead of prioritizing only enrollment and completion rates, institutional leaders could set goals with regional alliance partners for scaling science learning pathways from kindergarten through college, then work together to address unmet basic needs through partnerships with local community-based organizations, ultimately helping more BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) students obtain meaningful and family sustaining careers—in STEM and other high demand fields.

If we truly aspire to have a STEM workforce that is more representative of the country and equity in STEM education more broadly, regional alliances must intentionally engage and support the institutions where students of color are enrolling—and for many, that is community colleges.

Ryan Kelsey

It has long been observed that collaborations, alliances, and strategic partnerships are able to accomplish greater systemic change related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and research. There is an imperative for the nation’s competitiveness that we cultivate and harness the talent of individuals with a breadth of knowledge, backgrounds, and expertise.

The American Association for the Advancement for Science has spearheaded the development of a national strategy referred to as the STEMM Opportunity Alliance—the extra M refers to medicine—to increase access and enhance the inclusion of all the nation’s talent to accelerate scientific and medical innovations and discoveries. AAAS collaborates with the Doris Duke Foundation and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy in this effort. The alliance’s stated goal, set for 2050, is to “bring together cross-sector partners in a strategic effort to achieve equity and excellence in STEMM.”

Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner offer a similar approach. What is compelling about their essay is not only the delineation of the positive impact of different cross-sector collaborations across the nation on outcomes for science teaching and learning, but also the focus on the local community or region. The authors advocate for “Alliances for STEM Opportunity” along with a coordinating hub to ensure strong connections, a clear (consistent) understanding of regional and local priorities, and a collaborative action plan for addressing the needs of the community through effective and integrated science education.

This recommendation is reminiscent of the National Science Foundation’s Math and Science Partnerships program, started in 2002 but now discontinued. One of its focal areas, “Community Enterprise for STEM Learning,” was designed to expand partnerships “in order to provide and integrate necessary supports for students.” Singer, Schweingruber, and Brenner make a strong case and provide evidence for why regional alliances could lead (and have led) to improvements, which include enhanced teacher preparation, increased scores on standardized tests, a more knowledgeable workforce with relevant skills for industry, and a stronger STEM infrastructure in the region. Not only does this approach make sense; it has also shown to be effective. I know firsthand the significant benefits of alliances and partnerships from my former role as an NSF program officer, where I served as the co-lead of the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation Program and a member of the inaugural group of program officers that implemented the INCLUDES program, a comprehensive effort to enhance US leadership in STEM discovery and innovation.

As a member of the executive committee for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Roundtable on Systemic Change in Undergraduate STEM Education, I have engaged in wide discussions about the various factors that have been shown to contribute to the transformation of the STEM education ecosystem for the benefit of the students we are preparing to be STEM professionals, researchers, innovators, and leaders. Systemic change does not occur in silos; it occurs through intentional collaborations and a commitment from all stakeholders to transform infrastructure and culture.

Tasha R. Inniss

It is a delight to see Alliances for STEM Opportunity highlighted by Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner. Over the past three years, serving as the executive director of one of the nation’s first STEM Learning Ecosystems (a term coined by the Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM), in Tulsa, Oklahoma, I’ve witnessed the Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance address enduring challenges in STEM education—issues that surpass local reforms and political shifts.

The authors rightly highlight that alliances are uniquely positioned to address persistent problems, even as reforms, politics, and priorities fluctuate. Improving learning pathways, reducing teacher shortages, increasing access to teacher resources and evidence-based teaching, promoting internal accountability, and supporting continuous improvement are all issues that might be partially resolved at the local level. However, these solutions require an infrastructure that allows for their dissemination and scaling to achieve systemic equity.

At the Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance—our iteration of the Alliances for STEM Opportunity—we agree that articulating a shared vision is the first step. Ours has evolved over the past decade, and we have found great alignment around our stated quest to “inspire and prepare all youth for their STEM-enabled future.” This vision represents a shift from workforce-centric thinking toward holistic youth development thinking.

To reach our goal, we collaborate with 300 partners to ensure all youth have access to excellent STEM experiences in school, out of school, and in professional settings. This entails numerous collaborations; funding and resourcing educators and partners; leading or hosting professional learning; supporting program planning and evaluation; and creating youth, family, and community events that ensure all stakeholders understand and truly feel connected to our motto: “STEM is Everywhere. STEM is Everyone. All are Welcome.”

By continually defining our shared work around excellent experiences and how they feed into our shared vision, we raise awareness and support an ambitious view of STEM education that advances learning in its individual and integrated disciplines. This enables us to advocate more effectively for funding, development, implementation, and improvement efforts from a principled and consistent position—both of which are increasingly needed in education.

With clarity on the value of STEM as a vehicle for ensuring foundational disciplinary understandings, we can carefully align stakeholders around a simple idea: STEM aims to address the issue of too few students graduating with competence in the STEM disciplines, confidence in themselves, and a pathway to the STEM workforce. STEM cannot meet this demand if the experiences in which we invest our time, talent, and resources do not advance our excellent experiences (shared work) and move us closer to inspired and prepared youth (our shared vision).

I echo the authors’ call for expanded funding and research into this evolving infrastructure and encourage others to connect with their local alliances by visiting https://stemecosystems.org/ecosystems.

Levi Patrick

Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner describe the importance of local collaborations among schools, postsecondary institutions, informal education, businesses, philanthropies, and community groups for improving science education from kindergarten through postsecondary education. Regional alliances bring together diverse stakeholders to improve science education in a local context, which is a powerful strategy for achieving both workforce development and goals for science literacy. As the authors also note, regional alliances contribute to the development of a better civic society. These alliances provide a venue for people to find common ground so that progress does not get lost to political polarization.

Opening pathways to STEM careers through alliances has broad societal benefits beyond just creating more scientists—it makes science more accessible and relevant to students’ lives, which is crucial for individual and societal well-being and effective participation in democracy. Science education emphasizes the importance of critical thinking, questioning assumptions, and evidence-based conclusions. These skills are essential for effective civic participation, as they enable individuals to evaluate claims, consider multiple perspectives, and engage in constructive dialogue.

Regional alliances can promote the integration of these skills throughout a school’s science curriculum and in community-based learning experiences. They can engage students in authentic, community-based science projects that address local issues, such as environmental conservation, public health, or sustainable development. By participating in these projects, students can develop a sense of agency, empathy, and social responsibility, as well as practical skills in problem-solving, collaboration, and communication. I want to highlight three ways regional alliances can contribute to the development of a better civic society that fosters informed, engaged, and socially responsible citizens.

First, regional alliances can bring together schools, businesses, government agencies, and community organizations to collaborate on science-based initiatives that enhance community resilience. For example, alliances can work on projects related to disaster preparedness, climate change adaptation, or public health emergencies. These partnerships can strengthen social capital, trust, and collective problem-solving capacity, which are essential for a thriving civic society.

Second, regional alliances can demonstrate ways to engage in respectful, evidence-based dialogue around controversial issues. This can include providing professional learning for teachers on facilitating difficult conversations, hosting community forums that model constructive discourse, and encouraging students to practice active listening and perspective-taking.

Third, regional alliances can create opportunities for students to take on leadership roles, express their ideas, and advocate for change in their communities. For example, alliances can support student-led science communication campaigns, development of policy recommendations, or community service projects. By empowering youth to be active participants in shaping their communities, alliances can contribute to the development of a more vibrant and participatory civic society.

Regional alliances focused on all levels of science education can play a vital role in building a better civic society by fostering scientific literacy, critical thinking, community engagement, and lifelong learning. By preparing students to be informed, engaged, and socially responsible citizens, these alliances can contribute to a more resilient, inclusive, and democratic society.

James B. Short

Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner’s essay and theory regarding regional alliances resonate within the funder community. In 2014, several STEM funders helped launch the STEM Learning Ecosystems Community of Practice (SLECoP). These leaders recognized the value of collective impact and the tenets of a regional model. Fast forward, philanthropic commitments in regionalized initiatives continue today. Singularly, funders cannot support all aspects of a regional alliance. However, hybrid investment portfolios or philanthropic collaboratives can illuminate the interdependencies throughout the continuum from kindergarten through career and collectively support various aspects of a centralized regional model.

The authors’ assessment offers a compelling response to the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics 2019 data that illustrated the status of the education-to-labor market pipelines throughout the country. The state-specific labor force data reflect exemplars and chasms in the continuum. The data indicate that 24 states lack a high concentration of STEM workers relative to the total employment within their respective states. Concentration is measured by those in the skilled technical workforce or those in the STEM workforce with a bachelor’s degree or above. The data also reveal that only 13 states have workforce in which 11.2% to 15% of participants have STEM bachelor’s degrees. Such regional inequalities threaten the nation’s capacity to close education, opportunity, and poverty gaps; meet the demands of a technology-driven economy; ensure national security; and maintain preeminence in scientific research and technological innovation.

Many socioeconomically disadvantaged communities lie within the lowest educational and workforce STEM concentrations. Implementing regionalized STEM pathway models would close opportunity gaps. The labor needed by 2030 dictates the need for collective impact, thought partners, and strategic alliances. Regional alliances would enable an inversion of the current STEM pathway status. Regional partnerships that begin with early education; ensure STEM teacher growth, support, and retention; guarantee equitable access; and end with industry engagement will ensure that the nation’s workforce supply outpaces its workforce demand.

As strategic partners, corporate and private philanthropy can fortify structural needs and build capacity for regional alliances. If the authors’ recommendations hold, consistent philanthropy can guarantee the sustainability of the principles of a regional model. I appreciate the authors’ emphasis for regional engagement. National centralization is always valued, but regional implementation has a greater propensity for viable execution. Regional activation allows local partners to tailor solutions and address the specific STEM workforce needs in their geography. Localized assessments will yield the best and wisest practices.

However, the key to bringing the authors’ recommendations to fruition is mutual interest and motivation by the constituents within a region to do so. Similar to regionalized interests and constituencies, most philanthropic investments are also regionalized. Regional funding partners can catalyze impetus for synergizing their STEM ecosystem allies. Therefore, as we consider the fate of the nation, I hope regional leaders and philanthropists will continue to take stock of the value and promise of the authors’ justified theory.

Errika Moore

Susan Singer, Heidi Schweingruber, and Kerry Brenner provide current examples and evidence to support and advance the central theme of the National Academies’ 2021 report Call to Action for Science Education: Building Opportunity for the Future. In reading the essay, the familiar saying that “all politics is local” came to mind as I thought about how broad national priorities—such as the report’s push for “better, more equitable science education”—can be used in the development of systems, practices, and supports that are focused regionally and locally. It also made me think about classroom connections and some of the recent instructional changes that foreground locality.

Over the past few years, the science education community has continued to make shifts in teaching and learning to center students’ ideas, communities, and culture as means to reach that Call to Action goal. Many of the educational resources published lately offer students and teachers the opportunity to consider a phenomenon, an observable event or problem, to begin the science learning experience. Students are provided with current data and information in videos and articles, then given the opportunity to ask questions that can be investigated. In the process of answering the students’ questions, science ideas are developed and explained that underlie the phenomenon being considered. Imagine how empowering it is to begin to answer questions that have personal and communal relevance and resonance. This type of science teaching and learning connects with the types of partnerships and experiences essential in the local and regional alliances, and serves to enrich and enliven the relevance and relatability to science as a career opportunity and civic necessity.

Additionally, it would be great to find ways to connect these local and regional alliances to make them even stronger and more common, by identifying ways to scale and sustain efforts, celebrate accomplishments, and share resources. One possibility might be some type of national convening that would provide the time and space where representatives from local and regional alliances could discuss what is working, seek support to solve challenges, and create other types of alliances through cooperation and collaboration. Science Alliance Opportunity Maps could be created to ensure that all students and their communities are being served and supported. The only competition would be the numerous and varied ways to make equitable science education a reality for every student, from kindergarten through the undergraduate years, in every region and locale of the nation. This would be a major step toward achieving Singer, Schweingruber, and Brenner’s hope for “not just a competitive workforce, but also a better civic society.”

Nancy Hopkins-Evans