Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents; findings
1,242 words·~6 min read·
/bill/116/s/2579/is/section-1A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
This Act may be cited as the . STEM Opportunities Act of 2019 The table of contents for this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents; findings. Sec. 2. Purposes. Sec. 3. Federal science agency policies for caregivers. Sec. 4. Collection and reporting of data on Federal research grants. Sec. 5. Policies for review of Federal research grants. Sec. 6. Collection of data on demographics of faculty. Sec. 7. Cultural and institutional barriers to expanding the academic and Federal STEM workforce.
Sec. 8. Research and dissemination at the National Science Foundation. Sec. 9. Research and related activities to expand STEM opportunities. Sec. 10. Tribal Colleges and Universities Program. Sec. 11. Report to Congress. Sec. 12. Merit review. Sec. 13. Definitions. The Congress finds the following: Many reports over the past decade have found that it is critical to our Nation’s economic leadership and global competitiveness that the United States educates and trains more scientists and engineers.
Research shows that women and minorities who are interested in STEM careers are disproportionately lost at nearly every educational transition and at every career milestone. The National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics at the National Science Foundation collects, compiles, analyzes, and publishes data on the demographics of STEM degrees and STEM jobs in the United States. Women now earn nearly 37 percent of all STEM bachelor’s degrees, but major variations persist among fields.
In 2017, women earned only 20 percent of all bachelor’s degrees awarded in engineering and 19 percent of bachelor’s degrees awarded in computer sciences. Based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data, jobs in computing occupations are expected to account for nearly 60 percent of the projected annual growth of newly created STEM job openings from 2016 to 2026. In 2017, underrepresented minority groups comprised 39 percent of the college-age population of the United States, but only 18 percent of students who earned bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields.
The Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, found that, while freshmen from underrepresented minority groups express an interest in pursuing a STEM undergraduate degree at the same rate as all other freshmen, only 22.1 percent of Latino students, 18.4 percent of African-American students, and 18.8 percent of Native American students studying in STEM fields complete their degree within 5 years, compared to approximately 33 percent of White students and 42 percent of Asian students who complete their degree within 5 years.
In some STEM fields, including the computer sciences, women persist at about the same rate through doctorate degrees. In other STEM fields, women persist through doctorate degrees at a lower rate. In mathematics, women earn just 26 percent of doctorate degrees compared with 42 percent of undergraduate degrees. Overall, women earned 38 percent of STEM doctorate degrees in 2016. The rate of minority students earning STEM doctorate degrees in physics is 9 percent, compared with 15 percent for bachelor’s degree.
Students from underrepresented minority groups accounted for only 11.5 percent of STEM doctorate degrees awarded in 2016. The representation of women in STEM drops significantly from the doctorate degree level to the faculty level. Overall, women hold only 26 percent of all tenured and tenure-track positions and 27 percent of full professor positions in STEM fields in our Nation’s universities and 4-year colleges. Black and Hispanic faculty together hold about 6.8 percent of all tenured and tenure-track positions and 7.5 percent of full professor positions.
Many of the numbers in the American Indian or Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander categories for different faculty ranks were too small for the National Science Foundation to report publicly without potentially compromising confidential information about the individuals being surveyed. The representation of women is especially low at our Nation’s top research universities. Even in the biological sciences, in which women now earn more than 50 percent of the doctorates and passed the 25 percent level 37 years ago, women make up only 25 percent of the full professors at the approximately 100 most research-intensive universities in the United States.
In the physical sciences and mathematics, women make up only 11 percent of full professors, in computer sciences only 10 percent, and across engineering fields only 7 percent. The data suggest that approximately 6 percent of all tenure-track STEM faculty members at the most research-intensive universities are from underrepresented minority groups, but in some fields the numbers are too small to report publicly. By 2050, underrepresented minorities will comprise 52 percent of the college-age population of the United States.
If the percentage of female students and students from underrepresented minority groups earning bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields does not significantly increase, the United States will face an acute shortfall in the overall number of students who earn degrees in STEM fields just as United States companies are increasingly seeking students with those skills. With this impending shortfall, the United States will almost certainly lose its competitive edge in the 21st century global economy.
According to a 2014 Association for Women in Science survey of over 4,000 scientists across the globe, 70 percent of whom were men, STEM researchers face significant challenges in work-life integration. Researchers in the United States were among the most likely to experience a conflict between work and their personal life at least weekly. One-third of researchers surveyed said that ensuring good work-life integration has negatively impacted their careers, and, of researchers intending to leave their current job within the next year, 9 percent indicated it was because they were unable to balance work and life demands.
Female students and students from underrepresented minority groups at institutions of higher education who see few others like themselves among faculty and student populations often do not experience the social integration that is necessary for success in all disciplines, including STEM. One in five children in the United States attend school in a rural community. The data shows that rural students are at a disadvantage with respect to STEM readiness. Among STEM-interested students, 17 percent of students in rural high schools and 18 percent of students in town-located high schools meet the ACT STEM Benchmark, compared with 33 percent of students in suburban high schools and 27 percent of students in urban high schools.
A substantial body of evidence establishes that most people hold implicit biases. Decades of cognitive psychology research reveal that most people carry prejudices of which they are unaware but that nonetheless play a large role in evaluations of people and their work. Unintentional biases and outmoded institutional structures are hindering the access and advancement of women, minorities, and other groups historically underrepresented in STEM. Workshops held to educate faculty about unintentional biases have demonstrated success in raising awareness of such biases.
In 2012, the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (in this Act referred to as NASA ) completed a report that— is specifically designed to help NASA grant recipients identify why the dearth of women in STEM fields continues and to ensure that it is not due to discrimination; and provides guidance that is usable by all institutions of higher education receiving significant Federal research funding on how to conduct meaningful self-evaluations of campus culture and policies.
The Federal Government provides 55 percent of research funding at institutions of higher education and, through its grant-making policies, has had significant influence on institution of higher education policies, including policies related to institutional culture and structure.