Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

107th Congress                                            Rept. 107-505
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                      Part 1

======================================================================



 
    UNDERGRADUATE SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY 
                       EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT ACT

                                _______
                                

 June 12, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Boehlert, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3130]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 
3130) to provide for increasing the technically trained 
workforce in the United States, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that 
the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
   I. Amendment.......................................................2
  II. Purpose of the Bill............................................10
 III. Background and Need for the Legislation........................10
  IV. Summary of Hearings............................................12
   V. Committee Actions..............................................13
  VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill........................15
 VII. Section-By-Section Analysis (By Title and Section).............16
VIII. Committee Views................................................20
  IX. Cost Estimate..................................................32
   X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................32
  XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)...........34
 XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations...............34
XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives..........34
 XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement.............................35
  XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................35
 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act...............................35
XVII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law.........35
XVIII.Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported..........35

 XIX. Committee Recommendations......................................36
  XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence...........................37

                              I. Amendment

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, 
Engineering, and Technology Education Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

  The Congress makes the following findings:
          (1) Studies show that about half of all United States post-
        World War II economic growth is a direct result of 
        technological innovation, and science, engineering, and 
        technology play a central role in the creation of new goods and 
        services, new jobs, and new capital.
          (2) The growth in the number of jobs requiring technical 
        skills is projected to be more than 50 percent over the next 
        decade.
          (3) A workforce that is highly trained in science, 
        mathematics, engineering, and technology is crucial to 
        generating the innovation that drives economic growth, yet 
        females, who represent 50 percent of the United States 
        population, make up only 19 percent of the science, 
        engineering, and technology workforce.
          (4) Outside of the biomedical sciences, the number of 
        undergraduate degrees awarded in the science, mathematics, 
        engineering, and technology disciplines has been flat or 
        declining since 1987, despite rapid population growth and a 
        significant increase in undergraduate enrollment over the same 
        period.
          (5) The demand for H-1B visas has increased over the past 
        several years, suggesting that the United States is not 
        training a sufficient number of scientists and engineers.
          (6) International comparisons of 24-year olds have shown that 
        the proportion of natural science and engineering degrees to 
        the total of undergraduate degrees is lower in the United 
        States than in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, 
        and Canada.
          (7) Technological and scientific advancements hold 
        significant potential for elevating the quality of life and the 
        standard of living in the United States. The quality and 
        quantity of such advancements are dependent on a technically 
        trained workforce.
          (8) Reversing the downward enrollment and graduation trends 
        in a number of science and engineering disciplines is not only 
        imperative to maintaining our Nation's prosperity, it is also 
        important for our national security.
          (9) The decline of student majors in science, mathematics, 
        engineering, and technology is reportedly linked to poor 
        teaching quality in these disciplines and lack of institutional 
        commitment to undergraduate education as compared to research.
          (10) Undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
        technology faculty generally lack any formal preparation for 
        their role as undergraduate educators. In addition, faculty 
        members are generally not rewarded, and in some cases are 
        penalized, for the time they devote to undergraduate education.
          (11) Faculty experienced in working with undergraduate 
        students report that undergraduate research experiences 
        contribute significantly to a student's decision to stay in an 
        undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
        major and to continue their education through graduate studies.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS

  In this Act--
          (1) the term ``academic unit'' means a department, division, 
        institute, school, college, or other subcomponent of an 
        institution of higher education;
          (2) the term ``community college'' has the meaning given such 
        term in section 7501(4) of the Elementary and Secondary 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7601(4));
          (3) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the National 
        Science Foundation;
          (4) the term ``eligible nonprofit organization'' means a 
        nonprofit research institute or a nonprofit professional 
        association with demonstrated experience delivering science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology education, as 
        determined by the Director;
          (5) the term ``institution of higher education'' has the 
        meaning given such term in section 101(a) of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)); and
          (6) the term ``research-grade instrumentation'' means a 
        single instrument or a networked system of instruments that 
        enable publication-quality research to be performed by students 
        or faculty.

SEC. 4. TECHNOLOGY TALENT.

  (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Technology 
Talent Act of 2002''.
  (b) Grant Program.--
          (1) In general.--The Director is authorized to award grants, 
        on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of 
        higher education with physical or information science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology programs for the 
        purpose of increasing the number and quality of students 
        studying and receiving associate or baccalaureate degrees in 
        the physical and information sciences, mathematics, 
        engineering, and technology. An institution of higher education 
        that is awarded a grant under this section shall be known as a 
        ``National Science Foundation Science and Engineering Talent 
        Expansion Center''.
          (2) Requirements.--
                  (A) Number.--The Director shall award not fewer than 
                10 grants under this section each year, contingent upon 
                available funds.
                  (B) Duration.--Grants under this section shall be 
                awarded for a period of 5 years, with the final 2 years 
                of funding contingent on the Director's determination 
                that satisfactory progress has been made by the grantee 
                during the first 3 years of the grant period toward 
                achieving the increases in the number of students 
                proposed pursuant to subparagraph (E).
                  (C) Principal investigator.--At least 1 principal 
                investigator for each grant awarded under this section 
                must be in a position of administrative leadership at 
                the institution of higher education, and at least 1 
                principal investigator must be a faculty member from an 
                academic department included in the work of the 
                project.
                  (D) Subsequent grants.--An institution of higher 
                education that has completed a grant awarded under this 
                section may apply for a subsequent grant under this 
                section.
                  (E) Increases.--
                          (i) Institutions of higher education with 
                        baccalaureate degree programs.--An institution 
                        of higher education that awards baccalaureate 
                        degrees and desires to receive a grant under 
                        this section shall propose in its application 
                        specific increases in the number of students 
                        who are United States citizens or permanent 
                        resident aliens obtaining baccalaureate degrees 
                        at the institution within the physical or 
                        information sciences, mathematics, engineering, 
                        or technology, and shall state the mechanisms 
                        by which the success of the grant project shall 
                        be assessed.
                          (ii) Community colleges.--A community college 
                        that desires to receive a grant under this 
                        section shall propose in its application 
                        specific increases in the number of students 
                        who are United States citizens or permanent 
                        resident aliens pursuing degrees, 
                        concentrations, or certifications in the 
                        physical or information sciences, mathematics, 
                        engineering, or technology programs or pursuing 
                        credits toward transfer to a baccalaureate 
                        degree program in the physical or information 
                        sciences, mathematics, engineering, or 
                        technology, and shall state the mechanisms by 
                        which the success of the grant project shall be 
                        assessed.
                  (F) Recordkeeping.--Grantee institutions shall 
                maintain, and transmit annually to the National Science 
                Foundation, in a format indicated by the Director, 
                baseline and subsequent data on undergraduate students 
                in physical and information science, mathematics, 
                engineering, and technology programs. Such data shall 
                include information on--
                          (i) the number of students enrolled;
                          (ii) student academic achievement, including 
                        quantifiable measurements of students' mastery 
                        of content and skills;
                          (iii) persistence to degree completion, 
                        including students who transfer from science, 
                        mathematics, engineering, and technology 
                        programs to programs in other academic 
                        disciplines; and
                          (iv) placement during the first year after 
                        degree completion in post-graduate education or 
                        career pathways.
                  (G) Priority.--The Director may give priority in 
                awarding grants under this section to institutions of 
                higher education whose application--
                          (i) indicates a plan to build on previous and 
                        existing efforts with demonstrated success, 
                        including efforts involving industry, in 
                        improving undergraduate learning and teaching, 
                        including efforts funded by Federal grants from 
                        the National Science Foundation or other 
                        agencies; and
                          (ii) provides evidence of a commitment by the 
                        institution's administration to support and 
                        reward faculty involvement in carrying out the 
                        proposed implementation plan for the project.
  (c) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this section 
may include--
          (1) projects that specifically aim to increase the number of 
        traditionally underrepresented students in the physical or 
        information sciences, mathematics, engineering, or technology, 
        such as mentoring programs;
          (2) projects that expand the capacity of institutions of 
        higher education to incorporate current advances in science and 
        technology into the undergraduate learning environment;
          (3) bridge projects that enable students at community 
        colleges to matriculate directly into baccalaureate physical or 
        information science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
        programs, including those targeted at traditionally 
        underrepresented groups in such disciplines;
          (4) projects including interdisciplinary approaches to 
        undergraduate physical and information science, mathematics, 
        engineering, and technology education;
          (5) projects that focus directly on the quality of student 
        learning, including those that encourage--
                  (A) high-caliber teaching, including enabling faculty 
                to spend additional time teaching participating 
                students in smaller class settings, particularly in the 
                laboratory environment, by, for example, providing 
                summer salary or other additional salary for faculty 
                members or stipends for students;
                  (B) opportunities to develop new pedagogical 
                approaches including the development of web-based 
                course strategies, distributed and collaborative 
                digital teaching tools, or interactive course modules; 
                and
                  (C) screening and training of teaching assistants;
          (6) projects that--
                  (A) facilitate student exposure to potential careers, 
                including cooperative projects with industry or 
                government that place students in internships as early 
                as the summer following their first year of study;
                  (B) provide part-time employment in industry during 
                the school year; or
                  (C) provide opportunities for undergraduates to 
                participate in industry or government sponsored 
                research;
          (7) projects that assist institutions of higher education in 
        States that participate in the Experimental Program to 
        Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) to broaden the science, 
        engineering, mathematics, and technology student base or 
        increase retention in these fields;
          (8) projects to encourage undergraduate research on-campus or 
        off-campus;
          (9) projects that provide scholarships or stipends to 
        students entering and persisting in the study of science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology;
          (10) projects that leverage the Federal investment by 
        providing matching funds from industry, from State or local 
        government sources, or from private sources; and
          (11) other innovative approaches to achieving the purpose 
        described in subsection (b)(1).
  (d) Assessment, Evaluation, and Dissemination of Information.--
          (1) Project assessment.--The Director shall require each 
        recipient of a grant awarded under this section to implement 
        project-based assessment that facilitates program evaluation 
        under paragraph (2) and that assesses the impact of the project 
        on achieving the purpose stated in subsection (b)(1), as well 
        as on institutional policies and practices.
          (2) Program evaluation.--Not later than 180 days after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall award at 
        least 1 grant or contract to an independent evaluative 
        organization to--
                  (A) develop metrics for measuring the impact of the 
                program authorized under this section on--
                          (i) the number of students enrolled;
                          (ii) student academic achievement, including 
                        quantifiable measurements of students' mastery 
                        of content and skills;
                          (iii) persistence to degree completion, 
                        including students who transfer from science, 
                        mathematics, engineering, and technology 
                        programs to programs in other academic 
                        disciplines; and
                          (iv) placement during the first year after 
                        degree completion in post-graduate education or 
                        career pathways; and
                  (B) conduct an evaluation of the impacts of the 
                program described in subparagraph (A), including a 
                comparison of the funded projects to identify best 
                practices with respect to achieving the purpose stated 
                in subsection (b)(1).
          (3) Dissemination of information.--The Director, at least 
        once each year, shall disseminate information on the activities 
        and the results of the projects assisted under this section, 
        including best practices identified pursuant to paragraph 
        (2)(B), to participating institutions of higher education and 
        other interested institutions of higher education.
  (e) Underrepresented Groups.--In carrying out the program authorized 
by this section the Director shall strive to increase the number of 
students receiving baccalaureate degrees, concentrations, or 
certifications in the physical or information sciences, mathematics, 
engineering, or technology who come from groups underrepresented in 
these fields.
  (f) Reports.--
          (1) List.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, the Director shall develop, and 
        disseminate to institutions of higher education, a list of 
        examples of existing institutional and government efforts 
        relevant to the purpose stated in subsection (b)(1).
          (2) Interim progress report.--At the end of the third year of 
        the program authorized under this section, the Director shall 
        transmit to the Congress an interim progress report of the 
        evaluation conducted under subsection (d)(2).
          (3) Final report.--Not later than 6 years after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to the 
        Congress a final report of the evaluation conducted under 
        subsection (d)(2).
  (g) Advisory Committee.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Director shall establish an advisory 
        committee, that includes significant representation from 
        industry and academic leaders, for the grant program authorized 
        under this section. The advisory committee shall--
                  (A) assist the Director in securing active industry, 
                and State and local government, participation in the 
                program;
                  (B) recommend to the Director innovative approaches 
                to achieving the purpose stated in subsection (b)(1); 
                and
                  (C) advise the Director regarding program metrics, 
                implementation and performance of the program, and 
                program progress reports.
          (2) Duration.--Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee 
        Act shall not apply to the advisory committee established under 
        this subsection.
  (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this 
section--
          (1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and
          (2) such sums as may be necessary thereafter.
  (i) Related Programs.--The Director shall give consideration to 
achieving the purpose stated in subsection (b)(1) by awarding grants to 
institutions participating in the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority 
Participation.

SEC. 5. INSTITUTIONAL REFORM.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a merit-
reviewed, competitive basis, to institutions of higher education to 
expand previously implemented reforms of undergraduate science, 
mathematics, engineering, or technology education that have been 
demonstrated to have been successful in increasing the number and 
quality of students studying and receiving associate or baccalaureate 
degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology.
  (b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this section 
may include--
          (1) expansion of successful reform efforts beyond a single 
        course or group of courses to achieve reform within an entire 
        academic unit;
          (2) expansion of successful reform efforts beyond a single 
        academic unit to other science, mathematics, engineering, or 
        technology academic units within an institution;
          (3) creation of multidisciplinary courses or programs that 
        formalize collaborations for the purpose of improved student 
        instruction and research in science, mathematics, engineering, 
        and technology;
          (4) expansion of undergraduate research opportunities beyond 
        a particular laboratory, course, or academic unit to engage 
        multiple academic units in providing multidisciplinary research 
        opportunities for undergraduate students;
          (5) expansion of innovative tutoring or mentoring programs 
        proven to enhance student recruitment or persistence to degree 
        completion in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology;
          (6) improvement of undergraduate science, mathematics, 
        engineering, and technology education for nonmajors, including 
        teacher education majors; and
          (7) implementation of technology-driven reform efforts, 
        including the installation of technology to facilitate such 
        reform, that directly impact undergraduate science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology instruction or research 
        experiences.
  (c) Selection Process.--
          (1) Applications.--An institution of higher education seeking 
        a grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
        Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
        information as the Director may require. The application shall 
        include, at a minimum--
                  (A) a description of the proposed reform effort;
                  (B) a description of the previously implemented 
                reform effort that will serve as the basis for the 
                proposed reform effort and evidence of success of that 
                previous effort, including data on student recruitment, 
                persistence to degree completion, and academic 
                achievement;
                  (C) evidence of active participation in the proposed 
                project by individuals who were central to the success 
                of the previously implemented reform effort; and
                  (D) evidence of institutional support for, and 
                commitment to, the proposed reform effort, including a 
                description of existing or planned institutional 
                policies and practices regarding faculty hiring, 
                promotion, tenure, and teaching assignment that reward 
                faculty contributions to undergraduate education equal 
                to, or greater than, scholarly scientific research.
          (2) Review of applications.--In evaluating applications 
        submitted under paragraph (1), the Director shall consider at a 
        minimum--
                  (A) the evidence of past success in implementing 
                undergraduate education reform and the likelihood of 
                success in undertaking the proposed expanded effort;
                  (B) the extent to which the faculty, staff, and 
                administrators are committed to making the proposed 
                institutional reform a priority of the participating 
                academic unit;
                  (C) the degree to which the proposed reform will 
                contribute to change in institutional culture and 
                policy such that a greater value is placed on faculty 
                engagement in undergraduate education and that a 
                commensurate reward structure is implemented to 
                recognize faculty for their scholarly work in this 
                area; and
                  (D) the likelihood that the institution will sustain 
                or expand the reform beyond the period of the grant.
          (3) Grant distribution.--The Director shall ensure, to the 
        extent practicable, that grants awarded under this section are 
        made to a variety of types of institutions of higher education.
  (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this 
section $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

SEC. 6. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a merit-
reviewed, competitive basis, to--
          (1) institutions of higher education;
          (2) eligible nonprofit organizations; or
          (3) consortia of institutions and organizations described in 
        paragraphs (1) and (2),
for professional development of undergraduate faculty in support of 
improved undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology education.
  (b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this section 
may include--
          (1) support for individuals to participate in scholarly 
        activities aimed at improving undergraduate science, 
        mathematics, engineering, and technology education including--
                  (A) sabbatical funding, including partial or full 
                support for salary, benefits, and supplies, for faculty 
                participating in scholarly research in--
                          (i) science, mathematics, engineering, or 
                        technology;
                          (ii) the science of learning; or
                          (iii) assessment and evaluation related to 
                        undergraduate instruction and student academic 
                        achievement;
                  (B) stipend support for graduate students and post-
                doctoral fellows to participate in instructional or 
                evaluative activities at primarily undergraduate 
                institutions; and
                  (C) release time from teaching for faculty engaged in 
                the development, implementation, and assessment of 
                undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
                technology education reform activities following 
                participation in a sabbatical opportunity or faculty 
                development program described in this subsection; and
          (2) support for institutions to develop, implement, and 
        assess faculty development programs focused on improved 
        instruction, mentoring, evaluation, and support of 
        undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
        students, including costs associated with--
                  (A) stipend support or release time for faculty and 
                staff engaged in the development, delivery, and 
                assessment of the faculty development program;
                  (B) stipend support or release time for faculty, 
                graduate students, or post-doctoral fellows from the 
                host institution or external institutions who are 
                engaged as participants in such faculty development 
                programs; and
                  (C) support for materials, supplies, travel expenses, 
                and consulting fees associated with the development, 
                delivery, and assessment of such faculty development 
                programs.
  (c) Applications.--An entity seeking a grant under this section shall 
submit an application to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 
containing such information as the Director may require. The 
application shall include, at a minimum--
          (1) a description of the activities to be carried out under 
        the proposed project and the projected impact of the project on 
        undergraduate majors and nonmajors enrolled in science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology courses or programs;
          (2) a plan for assessment of the outcomes of the proposed 
        project;
          (3) a plan for dissemination of information regarding the 
        activities and outcomes of the proposed project; and
          (4) evidence of institutional support for implementation of 
        the proposed project, including commitment to appropriate 
        faculty sabbaticals and release time from teaching.
  (d) Annual Meeting.--The Director shall convene an annual meeting of 
awardees under this section to foster greater national information 
dissemination and collaboration in the area of undergraduate science, 
mathematics, engineering, and technology education.
  (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are to be authorized to 
be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this 
section $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

SEC. 7. ACCESS TO RESEARCH-GRADE INSTRUMENTATION.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a merit-
reviewed, competitive basis, to institutions of higher education to 
support the acquisition of research-grade instrumentation and to 
support training related to the use of that instrumentation. 
Instruments provided through awards under this section shall be used 
primarily for undergraduate research, undergraduate instruction, or 
both, in science, mathematics, engineering, or technology.
  (b) Eligible Institutions.--Grants may be awarded under this section 
only to institutions of higher education that award fewer than 10 
doctoral degrees per year in disciplines for which the National Science 
Foundation provides research support.
  (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are to be authorized to 
be appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this 
section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

SEC. 8. UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH EXPERIENCES.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a merit-
reviewed, competitive basis, to institutions of higher education, 
eligible nonprofit organizations, or consortia thereof to establish 
sites that provide research experiences for 10 or more undergraduate 
science, mathematics, engineering, or technology students. The Director 
shall ensure that--
          (1) at least half of the students participating at each site 
        funded under this section shall be recruited from institutions 
        of higher education where research activities in science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology are limited or 
        nonexistent;
          (2) the awards provide undergraduate research experiences in 
        a wide range of science, mathematics, engineering, or 
        technology disciplines;
          (3) awards support a variety of projects including 
        independent investigator-led projects, multidisciplinary 
        projects, and multiinstitutional projects (including virtual 
        projects);
          (4) students participating in the projects have mentors, 
        including during the academic year, to help connect the 
        students' research experiences to the overall academic course 
        of study and to help students achieve success in courses of 
        study leading to a baccalaureate degree in science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology;
          (5) mentors and students are supported with appropriate 
        summer salary or stipends; and
          (6) all student participants are tracked through receipt of 
        the undergraduate degree and for at least 1 year thereafter.
  (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation to carry out this 
section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

SEC. 9. DISSEMINATION OF PROJECT INFORMATION.

  The Director shall ensure that all National Science Foundation-
sponsored undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or 
technology education projects, including those sponsored by National 
Science Foundation research directorates, shall disseminate via the 
Internet, at a minimum, the following information:
          (1) Scope, goals, and objectives of each project.
          (2) Activities, methodologies, and practices developed and 
        implemented.
          (3) Outcomes, both positive and negative, of project 
        assessment activities.

SEC. 10. EVALUATION.

  (a) In General.--The Director, through the Research, Evaluation and 
Communication Division of the Education and Human Resources Directorate 
of the National Science Foundation, shall evaluate the effectiveness of 
all undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
education activities supported by the National Science Foundation in 
increasing the number and quality of students, including students from 
groups underrepresented in science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology fields, studying and receiving associate or baccalaureate 
degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. In 
conducting the evaluation, the Director shall consider information on--
          (1) the number of students enrolled;
          (2) student academic achievement, including quantifiable 
        measurements of students' mastery of content and skills;
          (3) persistence to degree completion, including students who 
        transfer from science, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
        programs to programs in other academic disciplines; and
          (4) placement during the first year after degree completion 
        in post-graduate education or career pathways.
  (b) Assessment Benchmarks and Tools.--The Director, through the 
Research, Evaluation and Communication Division of the Education and 
Human Resources Directorate of the National Science Foundation, shall 
establish a common set of assessment benchmarks and tools, and shall 
enable every National Science Foundation-sponsored project to 
incorporate the use of these benchmarks and tools in their project-
based assessment activities.
  (c) Dissemination of Evaluation Results.--The results of the 
evaluations required under subsection (a) shall be made available to 
the public.
  (d) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, and once every 3 years thereafter, the 
Director shall transmit to the Congress a report containing the results 
of evaluations under subsection (a).

SEC. 11. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY ON UNDERGRADUATE 
                    RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION.

  (a) Study.--Not later than 3 months after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Director shall enter into an arrangement with the 
National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to 
perform a study on the factors that influence undergraduate students to 
enter and persist to degree completion in science, mathematics, 
engineering, and technology programs or to leave such programs and 
matriculate to other academic programs, as reported by students.
  (b) Transmittal to Congress.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to the 
Congress a report containing the results of the study under subsection 
(a).
  (c) Authorization of Appropriation.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation for carrying out this 
section $700,000 for fiscal year 2003, to remain available until 
expended.

SEC. 12. MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--
          (1) The Director shall establish a program to award grants to 
        Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and 
        Universities, Alaska Native-Serving Institutions, Native 
        Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, and tribally controlled colleges 
        and universities to enhance the quality of undergraduate 
        science, mathematics, and engineering education at such 
        institutions and to increase the retention and graduation rates 
        of students pursuing baccalaureate degrees in science, 
        mathematics, or engineering.
          (2) Grants shall be awarded under this section on a merit-
        reviewed, competitive basis.
  (b) Program Components.--Grants awarded under this section shall 
support--
          (1) activities to improve courses and curriculum in science, 
        mathematics, or engineering disciplines;
          (2) faculty development, including support for--
                  (A) sabbaticals and exchange programs to improve the 
                faculty's research competency and knowledge of 
                technological advances;
                  (B) professional development workshops on innovative 
                teaching practices and assessment;
                  (C) visiting faculty, including researchers from 
                industry; and
                  (D) faculty reassigned time or release time to mentor 
                students or to participate in curriculum reform and 
                academic enhancement activities;
          (3) stipends for undergraduate students participating in 
        research activities in science, mathematics, or engineering 
        disciplines on-campus or off-campus at industrial, 
        governmental, or academic research laboratories; and
          (4) other activities that are consistent with subsection 
        (a)(1), as determined by the Director.
  (c) Application.--An institution seeking funding under this section 
shall submit an application to the Director at such time, in such 
manner, and containing such information as the Director may require.

SEC. 13. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION PROGRAM.

  (a) Core Science and Mathematics Courses.--Section 3(a) of the 
Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 1862i(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) by inserting ``, and to improve the quality of their core 
        education courses in science and mathematics'' after 
        ``education in advanced-technology fields'';
          (2) in paragraph (1) by inserting ``and in core science and 
        mathematics courses'' after ``advanced-technology fields''; and
          (3) in paragraph (2) by striking ``in advanced-technology 
        fields'' and inserting ``who provide instruction in science, 
        mathematics, and advanced-technology fields''.
  (b) Articulation Partnerships.--Section 3(c)(1)(B) of the Scientific 
and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 1862i(c)(1)(B)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i);
          (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (ii) and 
        inserting a semicolon; and
          (3) by adding after clause (ii) the following new clauses:
                  ``(iii) provide students with research experiences at 
                bachelor-degree-granting institutions participating in 
                the partnership, including stipend support for students 
                participating in summer programs; and
                  ``(iv) provide faculty mentors for students 
                participating in activities under clause (iii), 
                including summer salary support for faculty mentors.''.
  (c) Advanced Technological Education Advisory Committee.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Director shall establish an advisory 
        committee on science, mathematics, and technology education at 
        community colleges consisting of non-Federal members, including 
        representatives from academia and industry. The advisory 
        committee shall review, and provide the Director with an 
        assessment of, activities carried out under the Advanced 
        Technological Education Program (in this section referred to as 
        the ``Program''), including--
                  (A) conformity of the Program to the requirements of 
                the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992;
                  (B) the effectiveness of activities supported under 
                the Program in strengthening the scientific and 
                technical education and training capabilities of 
                community colleges;
                  (C) the effectiveness of the National Science 
                Foundation and institutions receiving awards under the 
                Program in disseminating information to other community 
                colleges about activities carried out under the Program 
                and about model curricula and teaching methods 
                developed under the Program;
                  (D) the balance of resources allocated under the 
                Program for support of national centers of excellence, 
                individual institution grants, and articulation 
                partnerships; and
                  (E) other issues identified by the Director.
        The advisory committee shall make recommendations to the 
        Director for improvements to the Program based on its reviews 
        and assessments.
          (2) Advisory committee reports.--The advisory committee 
        established under paragraph (1) shall report annually to the 
        Director and to Congress on the findings and recommendations 
        resulting from the reviews and assessments conducted in 
        accordance with paragraph (1).
          (3) Duration.--Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee 
        Act shall not apply to the advisory committee established under 
        this subsection.
  (d) National Science Foundation Report.--Within 6 months after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit a report 
to Congress on--
          (1) efforts by the National Science Foundation and awardees 
        under the Program to disseminate information about the results 
        of projects;
          (2) the effectiveness of national centers of scientific and 
        technical education established under section 3(b) of the 
        Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 in serving as 
        national and regional clearinghouses of information and models 
        for best practices in undergraduate science, mathematics, and 
        technology education; and
          (3) efforts to satisfy the requirement of section 3(f)(4) of 
        the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992.
  (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the National Science Foundation--
          (1) for activities to improve core science and mathematics 
        education in accordance with section 3(a) of the Scientific and 
        Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 1862i(a)), as 
        amended by subsection (a) of this section, $5,000,000 for each 
        of fiscal years 2003 through 2007;
          (2) for acquisition of instrumentation in accordance with 
        section 3(a)(4) of the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act 
        of 1992--
                  (A) $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
                  (B) $3,500,000 for fiscal year 2004;
                  (C) $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
                  (D) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
                  (E) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
          (3) for support for research experiences for undergraduate 
        students in accordance with section 3(c)(1)(B) of the 
        Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 
        1862i(c)(1)(B)), as amended by subsection (b) of this section, 
        $750,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

                        II. Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of the bill is to make improvements in 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
education and to increase the number of graduates of programs 
in these areas.

              III. Background and Need for the Legislation

    As U.S. economic growth continues to depend largely upon 
advances in science and technology, the nation's continued 
prosperity is linked inextricably to the ability to produce a 
technologically sophisticated workforce. However, since 1986, 
while the percentage of degrees awarded in the biological and 
social sciences has increased sharply, there has been a 
troubling decrease in the percentage of U.S. baccalaureate 
degrees awarded in the physical sciences, engineering, 
mathematics, and computer science. In contrast, Asian and 
European countries have shown strong growth in degree 
production in all science and engineering fields and Asian 
institutions of higher education produce approximately six 
times as many engineering degrees as do U.S. institutions.
    The limited numbers of students pursuing science, 
mathematics, and engineering degrees appears to be a result of 
at least two factors: too few students who enter college 
wanting to major in one of those fields, and too many students 
who initially show such interest changing their minds during 
the first two years of their college education. Evidence of a 
decline in the percentage of freshmen choosing to enter and 
remain in mathematics and science-based majors first became 
apparent in the mid-1980s, as a result of a number of studies. 
Researchers determined that 40 percent of science, mathematics, 
and engineering undergraduates left the major, and that most 
did so within the first 2.5 years of the undergraduate 
experience. Similarly, a 2002 report by the U.S. Department of 
Education's National Center for Educational Statistics showed 
that fewer than 50 percent of students who intend to major in 
science and engineering fields complete a science or 
engineering degree within five years.
    There is some evidence that poor K-12 preparation in 
mathematics has a significant impact on a student's decision to 
enroll in undergraduate science, mathematics and engineering 
coursework. According to NSF's Science and Engineering 
Indicators 2002, more than 40 percent of freshmen at public 
two-year colleges and 22 percent of freshmen at public four-
year colleges required remedial work in reading, writing or 
mathematics. Among its science and engineering disciplines, 
approximately 28 percent of first-year students intending to 
major in the social and behaviorial sciences and 25 percent of 
those intending to major in biological or agricultural science 
reported the need for remedial mathematics instruction. Fifteen 
percent of engineering and physical sciences majors reported a 
similar need for remedial mathematics instruction. A recent 
survey also found that students are facing increasing demands 
on their time, with nearly 75 percent of today's college 
students engaging in at least part-time work and 25 percent 
working full time.
    However, factors not under the control of institutions of 
higher education, such as preparation at the K-12 level and 
non-academic workload, seem unlikely to provide the entire 
explanation for the current situation. While it has been 
difficult to determine the precise factors that precipitate an 
individual student's decision to leave a science or engineering 
major, a number of signs point of factors such as poor teaching 
and limited mentoring. For example, a 1997 study of students 
who scored high (above 650) on the mathematics section of the 
SAT I and who declared majors in science, mathematics and 
engineering showed that both those who switched out of science, 
mathematics and engineering majors and those who persisted in 
these majors through graduation had similar complaints of poor 
teaching and difficulty in getting help with academic problems. 
The authors of this study were unable to identify the precise 
factors that differentiated the ``switchers'' from the 
``survivors,'' but anecdotal evidence highlighted the positive 
impact of intervention by a faculty member at a crisis time in 
the student's academic or personal life.
    Some experts who are critical of the current undergraduate 
education enterprise have pointed to factors such as lack of 
rewards for faculty engaged in undergraduate education, poor 
facilities, limited equipment and supplies for education-based 
activities, and a ``survival of the fittest'' mentality in 
science, mathematics and engineering departments as likely 
additional reasons for the high attrition rates evident in 
science and engineering programs.
    Adding to the complexity of the problem is the diversity of 
undergraduate institutions in the U.S. Although research-
intensive universities produce most of the engineering degrees 
and a large proportion of the natural and social science 
degrees at the undergraduate level, student enrollment at those 
institutions represents less than 30 percent of the total 
undergraduate enrollment nationwide. Comprehensive universities 
and colleges account for approximately 23 percent of the total 
U.S. undergraduate enrollment, and liberal arts institutions 
for approximately 7 percent. Two-year colleges account for 
nearly 40 percent of the total undergraduate enrollment, and 
yet their impact on the number of science and engineering 
baccalaureate degrees conferred remains largely unrecognized 
since many students transfer to a four-year institution without 
first earning an associate degree. The diversity of U.S. 
institutions of higher education should be regarded as a 
strength, and not a liability, in improving scientific literacy 
broadly and in increasing the number of science and engineering 
graduates in particular, but it is clear that reform must not 
be a one-size-fits-all endeavor.
    While current data provide no clear guidelines or best 
practices regarding undergraduate education reform, both the 
National Research Council's Committee on Undergraduate Science 
Education \1\ and the National Science Foundation (NSF) \2\ 
have made a number of recommendations regarding institutional 
arid departmental reforms necessary to improve undergraduate 
science and engineering education. Those recommendations 
include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ National Research Council Committee on Undergraduate Science 
Education, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education, 
Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, 
engineering, and technology, 1999.
    \2\ National Science Foundation, Shaping the future: New 
expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, 
engineering and technology, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Take an institutional approach to change and 
        ensure that the undergraduate education activities of 
        the institution are a high priority;
           Give all students math and science literacy 
        so that all students can function in a technologically 
        sophisticated world and so that more students can 
        prepare for careers in science and engineering;
           Help faculty improve their teaching through 
        the incorporation of research on learning into the 
        classroom and through the inclusion of collaborative 
        and active learning, discovery and inquiry in the 
        classroom;
           Increase opportunities for undergraduate 
        research so that all students, and especially students 
        majoring in science and engineering and those preparing 
        to be teachers, are engaged in the excitement of new 
        research findings;
           Expand interdisciplinary teaching to better 
        reflect the increased workplace emphasis on 
        interdisciplinary approaches; and
           Include industry and potential employers in 
        planning curricular changes.
    This Act addresses each of the recommendations above and 
provides activities and funding intended to foster and 
facilitate improved undergraduate education at all institutions 
and for all students. The Act is focused on reforms that will 
improve student learning and increase the number and quality of 
science, mathematics, engineering and technology majors. In 
addition, this Act provides the framework for a national 
evaluation of ``what works'' through the identification of 
causal relationships between practices and outcomes.

                        IV. Summary of Hearings

    On Wednesday, March 7, 2002, the Subcommittee on Research 
of the Committee on Science held a hearing to examine the 
current state of undergraduate mathematics, science, and 
engineering education, to learn about successful models of 
undergraduate education reform, and to hear recommendations for 
additional programs and opportunities that could advance the 
reform effort. Witnesses provided comments on and 
recommendations for additions to H.R. 3130, the Technology 
Talent Act of 2001, introduced by Chairman Boehlert and Rep. 
Larson on October 16, 2001. The Committee heard testimony from 
faculty and administrators at Sinclair College, James Madison 
University, the University of Colorado-Boulder, Swarthmore 
College, and the Georgia Institute of Technology. Witnesses 
addressed the need for increased access to instrumentation for 
the purposes of undergraduate teaching and research, additional 
research opportunities for undergraduate students, better 
mechanisms for tracking students, and improved institutional 
policies that reflect a commitment to undergraduate education 
reform.
    On Wednesday, March 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Research 
of the Committee on Science held a hearing to receive testimony 
on ways to determine the appropriate funding levels for NSF. 
The hearing witnesses included professors of engineering, 
economics and geology as well as a representative of General 
Electric Company. While the hearing was primarily focused on 
establishing criteria to be used in setting NSF budget levels, 
much of the testimony focused on the need to improve the 
education of undergraduates in science, mathematics and 
engineering. In particular, testimony was offered regarding the 
benefits of mentoring students and engaging them in research 
experiences beginning in middle school and continuing 
throughout the undergraduate years.
    On Monday, April 22, 2002, the Subcommittee on Research of 
the Committee on Science held a field hearing in Dallas, Texas 
to receive testimony on K-12 and undergraduate science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics education. 
TheCommittee heard testimony from representatives of the Dallas 
Independent School Board, Southern Methodist University, the University 
of Texas at Arlington, Jarvis Christian College, Texas Instruments, 
ExxonMobil, and Lockheed Martin. The witnesses examined challenges for 
improving K-12 and undergraduate STEM education; explored educational 
programs that could be developed or expanded to fill current gaps and 
stimulate STEM education reform; and discussed industry needs for a 
diverse and scientifically literate workforce for the 21st century.

                          V. Committee Actions

    On October 16, 2001, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood 
Boehlert and Rep. Larson introduced H.R. 3130, the Technology 
Talent Act of 2001, a bill to provide for increasing the 
technically trained workforce in the United States.
    The Subcommittee on Research met on May 9, 2002, to 
consider the bill. An Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute 
was offered by Chairman Boehlert, Mr. Larson, Research 
Subcommittee Chairman Smith (MI), and the ranking member of the 
Research Subcommittee, Ms. Johnson (TX). In addition to making 
technical corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) restricted 
disciplines included in the Technology Talent program to the 
physical and information sciences, mathematics, engineering and 
technology; (2) required the NSF Director to award 
Instutitional Reform grants to expand previously implemented 
undergraduate reform activities that have proven to be 
successful in increasing the number and quality of students 
receiving degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology; (3) required the Director to award grants for 
professional development of undergraduate faculty in support of 
improved undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology education; (4) required the Director to award grants 
to institutions of higher education to support the acquisition 
of research grade instrumentation and to support training 
related to its use; (5) required the Director to award grants 
to establish sites that provide research experiences for 10 or 
more undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology students; (6) required that all science, 
mathematics, engineering, and technology projects sponsored by 
NSF disseminate project information and results via the 
Internet; (7) required the Director to evaluate the 
effectiveness of all undergraduate science, mathematics, 
engineering, and technology education activities supported by 
NSF; and (8) required a study on the factors that influence 
undergraduates to enter and complete degrees in science, 
mathematics, engineering, and technology programs. The 
amendment was adopted by a voice vote. Ms. Johnson moved that 
the Subcommittee favorably report the bill, H.R. 3130, as 
amended, to the Full Committee on Science with the 
recommendation that it be in order for the amendment, in the 
nature of a substitute adopted by the Subcommittee, to be 
considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment 
under the five minute rule at Full Committee, and that staff be 
instructed to make technical and conforming changes to the bill 
as amended. With a quorum present, the motion was agreed to by 
a voice vote.
    The Full Committee on Science met on Wednesday, May 22, 
2002, to consider the bill. An amendment making technical 
changes to the bill was offered by Chairman Boehlert. An 
amendment was offered by Ms. Woolsey that would require the 
Director to strive to increase the number of underrepresented 
students receiving baccalaureate degrees in science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology and to require the 
program evaluation to include disaggregated data reflecting 
minority enrollment and graduation rates. Mr. Baca offered an 
amendment that would establish a Minority Serving Institutions 
Undergraduate Program to award grants to enhance the quality of 
science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education at 
qualifying minority-serving institutions. Mr. Baird offered an 
amendment that would amend the Scientific and Advanced 
Technology act of 1992 by: (1) expanding the purpose of NSF's 
Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program to include 
improvement of core math and science courses; (2) expanding the 
activities under the articulation partnerships section to 
include student research experiences at four year institutions; 
(3) establishing an ATE program Advisory Committee; and (4) 
authorizing additional funding for acquisition of state-of-the-
art instruments required for science and technology education. 
These four amendments were merged into one En Bloc amendment, 
which was passed by a voice vote. Mr. Hall moved that the 
Committee favorably report the bill, H.R. 3130, as amended, to 
the House with the recommendation that the bill as amended do 
pass and that the staff be instructed to make technical and 
conforming changes to the bill as amended and prepare the 
legislative report and that the Chairman take all necessary 
steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. 
With a quorum present, the motion was agreed to by a voice 
vote.

              VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill

     Authorizes NSF to provide grants to institutions 
of higher education to increase the number and quality of 
graduates from science, mathematics, engineering and technology 
programs. Allows priority to be given to institutions with 
proposals that build on existing, successful efforts. Requires 
awardees to submit to the Director annual reports outlining 
their success in achieving the goals outlined in their 
application. Requires the Director to award a grant to an 
independent organization to evaluate the impact of the program 
and identify the best practices. Authorizes $25 million for 
fiscal year 2003, and such sums as necessary thereafter.
     Requires NSF to provide grants to institutions of 
higher education to expand successful science, mathematics, 
engineering, and technology reform beyond a single course to an 
entire department as well as to improve science, mathematics, 
engineering, and technology courses for non-majors. Requires 
grantees to provide multidisciplinary research opportunities 
for students and expand tutoring or mentoring programs to 
enhance recruitment and completion of a degree. Requires 
applicants to submit a description of the previously 
implemented reform effort and requires the Director to assess 
the feasibility of the proposed expansion. Authorizes $15 
million per year for fiscal years 2003-2007.
     Requires NSF to provide grants to institutions of 
higher education, non-profits, or consortia thereof, for 
professional development projects aimed at improving science, 
mathematics engineering, and technology teaching. Allows grants 
to cover sabbatical funding, salary support, and stipends for 
graduate students and post doctoral fellows as well as support 
for mentoring undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, 
and technology students. Requires the Director to hold an 
annual meeting of all awardees to foster information 
dissemination and collaboration. Authorizes $8 million per year 
for fiscal years 2003-2007.
     Requires NSF to provide grants to institutions of 
higher education to support the acquisition of research grade 
instrumentation, which must be used primarily for research, 
instruction, or both, in science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology courses. Authorizes $10 million per year for fiscal 
years 2003-2007.
     Requires NSF to provide grants to institutions of 
higher education, non-profit entities, or consortia thereof, to 
establish sites that provide research experiences for ten or 
more undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology students. Requires that at least half of the 
students participating at each site come from an institution 
where there is little or no science, mathematics, engineering, 
or technology research activity. Requires that awards also 
include a wide range of science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology disciplines as well as appropriate summer stipends 
or salary for mentors and students. Authorizes $10 million per 
year for fiscal years 2003-2007.
     Requires the Director to evaluate the 
effectiveness of all undergraduate activities supported by NSF 
and every three years to submit a report to Congress detailing 
the results.
     Requires the National Academy of Sciences to 
perform a study detailing the factors that influence students 
to pursue a degree in science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology or to leave those majors for other disciplines. 
Authorizes $700,000 for fiscal year 2003 which is to remain 
available until expended.
     Requires the Director to award grants to minority 
serving institutions to enhance the quality of science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology education. Allows 
grants to support activities to improve courses and curriculum, 
faculty development, and stipends for undergraduate students.
     Amends the Scientific and Advanced Technology Act 
of 1992 by expanding the purpose of the ATE program to include 
improvement of core math and science courses and student 
research experiences at four-year institutions. Authorizes the 
Director to establish an advisory committee on science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology education at community 
colleges to evaluate the effectiveness of activities supported 
under the ATE program, and the effectiveness of NSF in 
disseminating information to other community colleges. Provides 
additional funding for acquisition of state-of-the-art 
instruments required for science and technology education at 
community colleges.

        VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (By Title and Section)


Sec. 1. Short title

    The ``Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and 
Technology Education Improvement Act''.

 Sec. 2. Findings

    Discusses the impact of technological advancement on 
economic growth and the concern that inadequate numbers of U.S. 
graduates in science and technology fields will slow the pace 
of U.S. technological advancement. Discuss weaknesses in 
current undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and 
technology education--including poor teaching and lack of 
institutional reward for teaching as a scholarly activity--that 
may contribute to the declines in enrollment in some areas of 
science, mathematics and engineering.

Sec. 3. Definitions

    Defines the terms ``academic unit'' to mean a department, 
division, institute, school, college or other subcomponent of 
an institution of higher education; ``community college'' to 
have the meaning given in section 7501(4) of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7601(4)); 
``Director'' to mean the Director of NSF; ``eligible nonprofit 
organization'' to mean a nonprofit research institute or 
professional association with demonstrated experience 
delivering science, mathematics, engineering or technology 
education; ``institution of higher education'' to have the 
meaning given in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)); and ``research-grade 
instrumentation'' to mean a single instrument or a networked 
system of instruments that enable publication-quality research 
to be performed by students or faculty.

Sec. 4. Technology talent

    Designates this section as the Technology Talent Act of 
2002 and authorizes the Director to award on a competitive, 
merit-reviewed basis, no fewer than ten five-year grants to 
institutions of higher education to increase the number and 
quality of students receiving degrees in the physical or 
information sciences, mathematics, engineering and technology. 
Requires applicants to propose strategies for generating 
specific increases in the number and quality of students 
studying toward and receiving these degrees. Allows the 
Director to give priority in awarding grants to institutions 
that plan to build on past success in improving undergraduate 
education, and suggests possible uses of funds. Requires that 
awardees provide annual reports to NSF on their progress toward 
meeting the goals identified in their application. Continued 
participation in the program beyond the third year is 
contingent upon demonstrated progress toward meeting the 
specific goals contained within the application. Requires the 
Director toaward at least one grant or contract to an 
independent organization to evaluate the program and identify best 
practices in undergraduate education.
    Authorizes $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, and such sums 
as may be necessary thereafter to carry out this section.

Sec. 5. Institutional reform

    Requires the Director to award merit-reviewed, competitive 
grants to institutions of higher education to expand previously 
implemented reforms of undergraduate science, mathematics, 
engineering or technology education that have been successful 
in increasing the number and quality of students studying and 
receiving degrees in these areas. Allowable uses of funds 
include: (1) the expansion of successful efforts beyond a 
single course or group of courses to an entire academic unit; 
(2) expansion of successful reform efforts beyond a single 
academic unit to another science, mathematics, engineering or 
technology academic unit; (3) creation of multidisciplinary 
courses or programs that formalize collaborations between 
various academic units; (4) expansion of undergraduate research 
opportunities; (5) expansion of innovative tutoring and 
mentoring programs; (6) improvement of science and mathematics 
education for non-majors, including education majors; and (7) 
implementation of technology-driven reform efforts that impact 
undergraduate instruction or research experiences.
    Requires institutions funded under this section to provide 
evidence of support for, and commitment to, the proposed reform 
effort including implementation of policies and practices 
regarding faculty hiring, promotion, tenure and teaching 
assignment that reward faculty contributions to undergraduate 
education equal to, or greater than, scholarly scientific 
research. Instructs the Director to ensure, to the extent 
practicable, that grants awarded under this section are made 
available to a variety of types of institutions of higher 
education. Authorizes $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 
through 2007 to carry out this section.

Sec. 6. Faculty development

    Requires the Director to award merit-reviewed, competitive 
grants to institutions of higher education, eligible nonprofit 
organizations, or consortia thereof, for professional 
development of current and future faculty to improve 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
education. Permits funds to be used to support individual 
professional development opportunities, including sabbatical or 
stipend support to enable faculty to engage in research in 
science, mathematics, engineering, technology, the science of 
learning, or educational assessment; stipend support for 
graduate students and post-doctoral fellows to participate in 
instructional activities at primarily undergraduate 
institutions; and release time from teaching for faculty 
engaged in the development, implementation, and assessment of 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering and technology 
education reform activities.
    Also permits funds to be used to support institutions 
seeking to develop and implement faculty development programs 
focused on improving instruction and mentoring, as well as 
evaluations of undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering 
and technology students. Requires the Director to convene an 
annual meeting of awardees under the section to foster greater 
national information dissemination and collaboration in this 
area. Authorizes $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 
through 2007 to carry out this section.

Sec. 7. Access to research-grade instrumentation

    Requires the Director to award merit-reviewed, competitive 
grants to institutions of higher education that award fewer 
than 10 doctoral degrees per year in disciplines that are 
supported by NSF research grants to support the acquisition of 
research-grade instrumentation. Requires that instruments 
acquired through awards under this section be used primarily 
for undergraduate research, instruction, or both. Authorizes 
$10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

Sec. 8. Undergraduate research experiences

    Requires the Director to award merit-reviewed, competitive 
grants to institutions of higher education, eligible nonprofit 
organizations, or consortia thereof, to establish sites that 
provide research experiences for 10 or more undergradaute 
science, mathematics, engineering or technology students. 
Requires the Director to ensure that at least half of the 
students participating at each site are recruited from 
institutions of higher education where research is limited or 
nonexistent and that awards reflect the range of science, 
mathematics, engineering or technology disciplines supported by 
NSF. Requires the Director to support a variety of types of 
projects including multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional 
projects and requires that all student participants have 
mentors throughout the academic year. Requires awardees to 
track student participants through receipt of the undergraduate 
degree and for at least one year thereafter. Authorizes 
$10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007.

Sec. 9. Dissemination of project information

    Requires the Director to ensure that all NSF-sponsored 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
education projects, including those sponsored by NSF's research 
directives, disseminate via the Internet information regarding 
the scope, goals and objectives of each project; the 
activities, methodologies and practices developed and 
implemented; and the outcomes--both positive and negative--of 
project assessment activities.

Sec. 10. Evaluation

    Requires the Director to evaluate the effectiveness of all 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
education activities supported by NSF in increasing the number 
and quality of students studying and receiving associate or 
baccalaureate degrees in science, mathematics, engineering and 
technology. Requires the Director to establish a common set of 
assessment tools for use by grant recipients in their project-
based assessment activities. Requires the Director to 
disseminate the results of the evaluations described in this 
section to the public and transmit to Congress a report 
containing the results of evaluations described in this section 
every three years. Requires the Director to evaluate and report 
the effectiveness ofundergraduate science, mathematics, 
engineering and technology programs on increasing the number and 
quality of students, including disaggregated data indicating the number 
of traditionally underrepresented students, who receive baccalaureate 
degrees in these areas.

Sec. 11. National Academy of Sciences study on undergraduate 
        recruitment and retention

    Requires the Director to enter into an arrangement with the 
National Research Council to perform a study of the factors 
that encourage undergraduate students to enter and obtain 
degrees in science, mathematics, engineering and technology 
programs or to leave such programs and matriculate to other 
academic programs. Requires the Director to transmit a report 
of the results of this study to Congress not later than 18 
months after the date of the enactment of this section. 
Authorizes $700,000 for fiscal year 2003.

Sec. 12. Minority-serving institutions undergraduate program

    Requires the Director to establish a program to award 
grants to minority-serving institutions to enhance the quality 
of undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering education at 
such institutions and to increase the retention and graduation 
rates of students pursuing baccalaureate degrees in those 
areas. Provides support for activities aimed at improving 
course and curricular materials, at providing faculty 
development opportunities in scholarly research or in improving 
instruction and assessment capabilities, and at engaging 
students in academic and industry research experiences.

Sec. 13. Advanced technological education program

    Amends and expands the Scientific and Advanced-Technology 
Act of 1992 to include support for improvement of core science 
and mathematics courses, including engineering and computer 
technology courses at community colleges that prepare students 
for transfer to four-year institutions. Expands activities 
supported under the Articulation Partnerships section of the 
1992 Act to include stipends for students engaged in 
undergraduate experiences at four-year institutions and support 
for faculty who serve as mentors to those students engaged in 
such research activities. Establishes an advisory committee 
that must include industry and academic representatives to 
evaluate, report, and make recommendations annually regarding 
the effectiveness and compliance of the ATE program with the 
1992 Act. Requires the Director to report on efforts to 
disseminate information about ATE-sponsored programs, the 
effectiveness of the national centers of excellence in serving 
as national and regional resources and clearinghouses, and 
efforts to maintain an accessible inventory of projects funded 
under this program. Authorizes $5,000,000 annually for fiscal 
years 2003 through 2007 for activities related to the 
improvement of core science and math education courses; 
$3,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, $3,500,000 for fiscal year 
2004, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; $4,500,000 for fiscal 
year 2006, and $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2007 for support the 
acquisition of state-of-the-art instruments required for 
preparing students in science and advanced technology; and 
$750,000 for support of research experiences for undergraduate 
students at four-year institutions as part of Articulation 
Partnerships grants.

                         VIII. Committee Views

    The Committee believes that undergraduate science, math, 
engineering and technology reform efforts have not been 
successful enough in achieving the changes in institutional 
culture that are required to better prepare increased numbers 
of undergraduate students in science, mathematics, engineering 
and technology. In addition, the Committee has concluded that, 
despite nearly twenty years of undergraduate education reform 
efforts, there is little understanding of the factors that 
truly influence a student's decision to enroll in, or withdraw 
from, a major in a science, mathematics, or engineering field.
    The programs authorized by this act are designed not only 
to address a number of barriers to high quality undergraduate 
education, such as inadequate facilities and poor preparation 
of faculty for their role as educators, but also to determine 
empirically those factors key to a student's success in science 
and engineering courses and majors. In addition, this Act 
provides opportunities and incentives for institutions to 
implement changes in policies and practices that will increase 
the number and quality of students who study, and ultimately 
earn degrees, in science, mathematics, engineering and 
technology.
    The Committee strongly believes that NSF is well positioned 
to run these programs given its historical relationship with 
institutions of higher education and its past work in the area 
of undergraduate education reform.

Section 4--The Technology Talent Act of 2002

    The Technology Talent Act of 2002 was sparked in part by 
concern over U.S. dependence on foreign workers in some areas 
of science and engineering--as evidenced by increasing H1-B 
visa petitions--and suggestions by Stanford economist Paul 
Romer that a disconnect exists between the private sector, with 
its demand for scientists and engineers, and the educational 
system, whose policies and practices are driven more by 
internal decisions and historical practices than by external 
supply and demand pressures.
    However, the Committee does not envision the Technology 
Talent Act of 2002 as a remedy to any particular workforce 
shortage. Recognizing the difficulty in accurately predicting 
future workforce needs, the Committee believes that directing 
funds solely toward today's specific workforce shortages risks 
leaving the nation unprepared to meet the challenges and 
demands of tomorrow. Rather, the primary goal of the Technology 
Talent program is to ensure that the Nation has a continuing 
supply of science, mathematics, engineering and technology 
majors both to maintain our leadership in technological 
innovation and to ensure a scientifically and technologically 
literate citizenry.
    The Technology Talent Act of 2002 provides incentives to 
institutions of higher education to implement programs, 
activities, and services that will have a direct impact on the 
number and quality of graduates in the physical and information 
sciences, mathematics, engineering and technology. The 
Committee values the contributions of the biological and social 
sciences, and the decision to focus this particular program on 
the physical sciences, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
in no way indicates that support for the biological or social 
sciences should be reduced or eliminated from any other NSF 
research or education activity. The Committee recognizes the 
success these disciplines have had in increasing the number of 
their graduates, and encourages other science and engineering 
disciplines to adopt and implement strategies that have been 
successful in the social and biological sciences.
    For the purposes of this section, the physical sciences 
include such fields as chemistry, physics, astronomy, and earth 
and atmospheric sciences, while the information sciences 
include such fields as computer science and bioinformatics. 
Mathematics includes such fields as theoretical and applied 
mathematics, and engineering includes such fields as electrical 
engineering, chemical engineering, bioengineering, biomedical 
engineering, aeronautical and astronautical engineering, 
computer engineering, software engineering, civil engineering, 
mechanical engineering, and materials engineering. The 
Committee strongly encourages the participation of 
interdisciplinary programs such as ones focused on 
nanotechnology, that prepare students for the contemporary 
workplace and that teach students to assimilate and transfer 
ideas from one science or engineering discipline to another.
    The term ``technology'' is intended to mean those programs 
offered primarily by two-year colleges that train individuals 
for direct employment by the high technology sector including 
information technology, engineering technology, computer 
technology, and biotechnology. The Committee assumes that 
students completing two-year technology degrees will be able to 
enter the workforce directly or transfer to a four-year school 
where credits earned under the technology degree could be 
applied toward a baccalaureate degree in a related area.
    To qualify for funding under the Technology Talent Act of 
2002, an institution of higher education must state a specific 
goal for increases in student enrollment and graduation that 
will result from the implementation of the proposed project, 
for all academic disciplines included in the proposed project. 
In addition, the applicant must provide a clear programmatic 
plan for meeting those projections. The Committee believes 
strongly that an institution of higher education must not 
reduce the rigor of its curriculum nor the standards by which 
student success is measured to increase enrollment and 
completion rates. An institution of higher education seeking 
funding under this section, therefore, must describe the 
metrics by which student performance will be measured and by 
which the quality of the instructional program will be 
evaluated.
    The Committee recognizes that many two-year colleges do not 
allow students to select majors or earn degrees in particular 
academic areas and may award degrees broadly in the arts or 
sciences. In such cases, those programs that prepare students 
for transfer to baccalaureate degree programs in the physical 
and information sciences, mathematics, engineering and 
technology, or that provide concentrated program of study or a 
certificate in one or more of those academic areas, do qualify 
for funding under this section. The Committee understands that 
many students transfer to four-year institutions prior to 
completing the associated degree at the community college. The 
Committee intends that, for the purposes of this section, a 
student's transfer to a physical or information science, 
mathematics or engineering program at a four-year institution 
or completion of a certificate program in one of these areas be 
considered a successful outcome equal to graduation from a 
community college program.
    The Committee intends that awards made under this section 
be five years in duration to allow adequate time to plan, 
implement and assess the activities proposed by the awardee. 
The Committee believes that by the third year of the grant, the 
awardee should have made significant progress toward the 
enrollment and graduation goals stated in the grant 
application. While the Committee recognizes that programmatic 
changes may not result in increased graduation rates for at 
least four years, the Committee believes that by the end of the 
third year of the grant, indications of future success, such as 
increased enrollment and retention rates, should be observable. 
The Committee assumes that an institution that is not making 
progress toward its projected goals and is not likely to 
achieve the projected increased by the end of the funded period 
will not receive the final two years of funding for an award 
made under this section.
    Because the focus of the Technology Talent Act of 2002 is 
increasing the number--while maintaining or improving the 
quality--of graduates in the specified academic areas, and 
because the final two years of funding depend upon demonstrated 
progress by the awardee during the first three years, the 
Committee believes that accurate record keeping and reporting 
are an important requirement of the program. Therefore, each 
grantee must report annually the number of students enrolled in 
the academic programs funded under their award and must track 
and report each student's academic performance, persistence to 
degree completion, and placement during the first year after 
graduation. The Committee assumes that a web-based data 
collection portal, similar to the one designed and used for 
NSF's Computer Science, Engineering and Mathematics scholarship 
program, will be established and operated by NSF to streamline 
the collection of student enrollment, graduation and 
performance data.
    It is the objective of the program to increase the number 
and quality of new majors rather than to encourage the transfer 
of students from one science, mathematics, or engineering 
discipline to another. Section 4(b)(2)(F) requires awardees to 
collect the data necessary to demonstrate that the projects 
funded through this program successfully attract new students 
into these majors and retain them through to graduation (or in 
the case of a community college, transfer to a four-year 
institution). The Committee also expects that NSF will ensure 
that the program as a whole meets this objective of attracting 
new students to these majors.
    In accordance with section 4(e), the Committee expects NSF, 
in selecting projects for support under this program, to take 
into consideration proposals that have promise for increasing 
the numbers of women and minorities pursuing and persisting in 
studies in these fields. Success in this regard should also be 
considered as one criterion for making subsequent awards under 
the program.
    The Committee believes that it should be up to the awardee 
institution to determine the particular metrics for evaluating 
student achievement. However, the Committee strongly believes 
that these metrics must be quantitative in nature and enable 
meaningful determinations of the quality of student academic 
achievement. These metrics might include grade point average, 
the use of standardized assessments, or other discipline-
developed quantitative measures of student academic 
achievement.
    The Committee believes that an important indicator of the 
quality of an educational program is the placement of graduates 
in either jobs or advanced educational programs. For this 
reason, institutions receiving funding under this section must 
determine placement of students within the first year after 
their graduation in a job or advanced educational program.
    The Committee understands that tracking students can be 
particularly difficult for community colleges where students 
frequently transfer to different institutions prior to degree 
completion. A community college awardee under this section 
therefore may establish procedures for tracking transfer 
students that include student-reported information, or data 
from four-year institutions to which these students are likely 
to transfer.
    The Committee recognizes the value of innovation in 
advancing the goals of the Technology Talent Act of 2002 but 
understands that results are also likely to come from the 
implementation of programs and practices already proven to have 
had success in increasing student enrollment and graduation 
rates. For that reason, the Committee encourages the Director 
to give priority to those institutions of higher education 
whose proposals build on successful previous efforts. In 
particular, the Committee recognizes that activities support 
under NSF's Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation 
(LSAMP) program have been successful in increasing the number 
of underrepresented minority student in science and engineering 
and, in accordance with section 4(i), expects NSF to consider 
grants to institutions participating in LSAMP as one approach 
in meeting the goals of the program established under this 
section.
    The Committee also recognizes the important of faculty in 
helping students through critical points in their academic 
careers and, therefore, encourages the Director to give 
priority to institutions of higher education that support and 
reward faculty for their productive involvement with 
undergraduate students. The Committee also strongly encourages 
institutions of higher education to work with industry in 
designing effective curricula, student internship programs, and 
student assessment activities and to leverage the federal 
investment with matching funds from industry, state or local 
government sources, or private sources.
    As is the case in all reform programs, the Committee 
believes that it is imperative that the activities supported 
under this section be evaluated to determine causal 
relationships between practices and outcomes. It is important 
that reform efforts help determine which activities have the 
greatest impact on student enrollment and graduation rates in 
each of the academic disciplines supported under this section 
and in relation to different student demographics and 
institutional types. Activities that are highly successful in 
one institution setting may not be effective or even possible 
to implement in another one. Therefore, the Director is 
required to implement a comprehensive assessment and evaluation 
program intended to identify best practices based on desired 
outcomes as well as student and institutional characteristics. 
This assessment and evaluation program must include project-
based assessment as well as program-wide evaluation.
    Project-based assessment is intended to evaluate the 
effectiveness of each project funded under this section and to 
identify those activities that were most important to the 
overall success of the awardee in meeting the projected 
increases in the number and quality of graduates and in 
achieving positive changes in institutional policies and 
practices in support of those goals. The Committee believes 
that project-based assessment should be fully planned and 
implemented at the outset of the funding period so that 
adequate baseline data can be collected and analyzed. It is 
important for each awardee to report both positive and negative 
findings related to the work supported under this section, as 
negative results are as important to increasing understanding 
of best practices as are positive ones. The Committee expects 
awardees to utilize appropriate controls and standards in 
performing the assessment.
    While individual projects must report project-based 
outcomes, the Committee also expects NSF to thoroughly evaluate 
and compare the results of all projects supported under this 
section to identify those elements of undergraduate education 
reform that are most critical to increasing the number and 
quality of science and engineering graduates. For that reason, 
the Director is instructed to retain the services of an 
independent evaluative organization to develop metrics for 
measuring the impact of the Technology Talent program on 
student enrollment and graduation rates, student performance as 
measured by quantifiable means, and student placement following 
graduation.
    Because the independent evaluator will rely heavily on data 
collected and reported by grantees, the Committee recognizes 
that the evaluator must inform each awardee of the data that 
must be collected prior to the awardee initiating the proposed 
activities. Therefore, the Director is to contract with the 
independent evaluator within 180 days of the enactment of this 
section so that the evaluation metrics can be developed and 
disseminated to all awardees in a timely manner.
    The Committee believes that NSF can play an important role 
in helping institutions of higher education engage in effective 
reform activities simply by providing information about current 
and prior reform efforts. The Committee expects that the 
Director, inreports that summarize the evaluation of particular 
programs, such as those specified in sections (4)(f)(2) and (4)(f)(3), 
will include a comparison of enrollment and graduation trends at 
institutions supported by the Technology Talent program as well as 
those that are not.
    The Director must establish an advisory committee that can 
secure active participation by industry and state and local 
governments in this program, and can recommend innovative 
strategies to meet the goals and evaluate the impact of the 
program. The Committee believes that a Committee of Visitors, 
typically established by NSF for the purpose of program 
direction and evaluation, would fulfill the requirement for the 
Advisory Committee described in section (4)(g) so long as the 
constitution and responsibilities of the Committee of Visitors 
reflect that of the Advisory Committee described by this 
paragraph.

Section 5--Institutional reform

    The Committee is aware that a number of NSF-funded 
undergraduate education reform programs have enabled 
institutions of higher education to implement small-scale 
efforts to improve individual courses and programs. However, 
the Committee believes that to be truly effective, reform 
efforts must encompass entire academic units and drive 
significant cultural changes in education practice and 
institutional policy. The Committee feels that additional 
investment in those institutions that have demonstrated their 
capacity for reform through small-scale efforts is an important 
step towards implementing reforms that will have an impact on 
greater numbers of undergraduate students.
    This Act requires the Director to create a new program to 
meet the goals of section 5, or to modify an existing program 
to do so. Institutional reform grant funds may be used for 
activities that expand successful reform efforts beyond a 
single course or group of courses to achieve reform within an 
entire academic unit or within another academic unit at the 
awardee institution. The Committee strongly encourages the use 
of Institutional Reform funds to create multidisciplinary 
courses or programs that formalize collaborations among various 
science, mathematics, engineering and technology departments or 
between schools of science and engineering and schools of 
education for the purpose of improving the education of future 
K-12 teachers.
    In awarding Institutional Reform grants, the Director must 
consider the quality of the reform effort proposed, the 
likelihood of success based on the results of past reform 
efforts, and evidence that those engaged in the previous effort 
will play a key role in the proposed effort. The Committee 
strongly believes that an important element of institutional 
reform is the commitment by the institution to implementing 
hiring, promotion and tenure policies that reward faculty for 
contributions to undergraduate education. The Committee intends 
that this program help drive cultural changes at institutions 
of higher education so that teaching and mentoring are valued 
as important faculty scholarly activities. The Committee 
believes that if faculty are to invest time and energy in 
productive education reform activities, they must do so knowing 
that they will receive professional advancement and reward for 
their work.

Section 6--Faculty development

    The Committee is concerned that most undergraduate science 
and engineering faculty have received little or no training to 
prepare them for their roles as undergraduate teachers and 
mentors. Without training; faculty tend to teach as they were 
taught, often using ineffective methods and perpetuating the 
``survival of the fittest'' culling process for science and 
engineering majors.
    The Committee views sabbatical research opportunities as an 
important way to enhance undergraduate faculty performance in 
both research and teaching. In addition, to better prepare 
future faculty for their role as undergraduate educators and 
mentors, the Committee feels that it is very important to 
provide opportunities for graduate students and post-doctoral 
fellows to receive instructional training. Therefore, the 
Faculty Development program established by this section 
includes stipends to graduate students and post-doctoral 
fellows for the purpose of participating in an undergraduate 
education training opportunity.
    The Committee realizes that some institutions of higher 
education, professional societies and non-profit entities have 
been successful in developing programs that engage a number of 
faculty in professional development and undergraduate reform 
activities, and this Act provides support for these programs. 
The Committee encourages NSF to include adjunct faculty as 
participants in these programs. Similarly, the Committee 
encourages NSF to consider the unique needs of teaching 
assistants and to encourage institutions of higher education to 
provide instructional training to teaching assistants as part 
of NSF-supported faculty development programs.

Section 7--Access to research grade instrumentation

    Currently, NSF provides support for small instruments used 
in undergraduate classroom laboratory settings (primarily 
through the Course, Curriculum and Laboratory Improvement 
Program) and for faculty research (primarily through the 
Research at Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) and the Major 
Research Instrumentation (MRI) program). However, NSF has no 
program to fund the purchase of research-grade instruments for 
the primary purpose of undergraduate instruction or 
undergraduate research. NSF and the scientific community have 
emphasized the positive impact that undergraduate research 
appears to have on student performance as well as on student 
persistence through degree completion and the decision to 
pursue graduate education. Therefore, the Committee believes 
that all institutions that educate undergraduate students--
including liberal arts institutions, comprehensive 
undergraduate institutions, and community colleges--ought to 
have access to sophisticated instruments to engage 
undergraduate students in meaningful research experiences.
    The focus of the program described in section 7 is to 
provide instruments to those institutions that lack research 
infrastructure, defined under this section as institutions of 
higher education--including community colleges--that award 
fewer than ten total doctoral degrees per year in the natural 
and physical sciences, mathematics, engineering, and technology 
disciplines. The Committee also strongly encourages the 
Director to use funds established under this Section to provide 
supplemental funding tocommunity colleges funded under the 
Advanced Technological Education Act of 1992 to support the purchase of 
research-grade instruments.
    The Committee believes that instruments purchased primarily 
for the purpose of undergraduate instruction and research may 
also be used for the purpose of faculty research as long as the 
faculty research does not interfere with use of the instrument 
by undergraduate students.
    The Committee is concerned that NSF's Research at 
Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) program does not have a 
definitive program budget; rather, funds to support a request 
for instrumentation or research support made under an RUI 
solicitation must come from the general research budget. The 
Committee recognizes that research conducted at institutions 
focused more on undergraduate education than on research is 
often of high quality and importance and provides significant 
benefits for the undergraduate students involved in the work. 
However, because these institutions often lack access to high 
quality research facilities, graduate students, and post-
doctoral fellows, their research output is typically lower than 
that of more research-oriented institutions. As such, 
undergraduate education-focused institutions typically face 
significant obstacles when competing against research-intensive 
institutions for limited instrumentation funding. The Committee 
believes that RUI funds should be set aside from core research 
funds and that awards made under the RUI program should be 
tracked and assessed as if the RUI program were a distinct 
program with designated funds.

Section 8--Undergraduate research experiences

    The Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program 
at NSF provides opportunities that are often ``turning points'' 
in the lives of many future scientists and engineers. The REU 
program is currently divided into two tracks: supplemental 
awards to existing research grants that support one or two 
students in a summer research experience, and site awards that 
provide formal research opportunities for ten or more students 
at a particular institution.
    For REU site awards under section 8, the Committee charges 
the Director with ensuring that at least half of the students 
included in any given site come from institutions, that 
including community colleges, where research is limited or non-
existent. The Committee intends that the term ``limited'' mean 
institutions where a few but not all faculty are engaged in 
research, where the research infrastructure is rudimentary, 
where scholarly research activity is not a primary factor in 
promotion and tenure decisions, or where faculty research does 
not result in the publication of scholarly papers.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of mentoring in 
enriching a student's research activities, and believes it is 
most appropriate to engage faculty from the REU student 
participant's home institution to serve as a mentor during the 
academic year, in order to facilitate stronger connections 
between the students' home institution and the REU site. The 
Committee also encourages the Director to give priority to 
those proposals that engage faculty from a variety of 
institutions in the activities of the REU site.
    The Committee is concerned that the NSF does not have 
mechanisms in place to fund large, multidisciplinary REU sites. 
As a result, institutions may be managing REU awards in 
different academic disciplines separately and opportunities for 
students to engage in multidisciplinary research or to interact 
with students in other discipline areas may be lost. The 
Committee encourages the Director to establish funding 
mechanisms for larger, multi-disciplinary REU Sites to 
streamline the management of programs at awardee institutions 
and to provide expanded opportunities to students. In addition, 
given the ability to link geographically distant campuses and 
facilities, the Committee encourages the Director to allow 
`virtual' collaborative efforts to be included in the portfolio 
of NSF-funded REU Sites. The Committee believes that virtual 
collaboration can be especially productive for students engaged 
in computer science-related research experiences. The Committee 
encourages the Director to allow professional societies and 
non-profit associations to act as facilitators of REU 
collaborative programs that involved a number of campuses. 
Professional societies can be instrumental in linking a number 
of campuses and in providing national outreach to students to 
inform them about REU opportunities.
    Finally, in order to ensure that students in a wide variety 
of disciplines have access to research experiences, this 
section requires the Director to establish mechanisms to ensure 
that the REU Site portfolio reflects the diversity of academic 
disciplines supported by NSF funds. The Director is also 
required to evaluate the REU program to determine its impact on 
student persistence to degree completion and enrollment in 
graduate level programs in science, mathematics and 
engineering.

Section 9--Dissemination of project information

    The Committee has found that it can be difficult to locate 
specific information about NSF-funded projects, such as the 
precise methodologies, activities, practices and materials 
being developed and implemented by awardees. Even harder to 
find can be information regarding positive and negative 
outcomes of the funded work beyond a few published articles in 
professional journals or from NSF-sponsored meetings for 
principal investigators. The Committee views NSF-funded work as 
being intrinsically valuable not only to the funded 
investigator, but to the community at large. Therefore, this 
Act requires the Director to ensure that all undergraduate 
science, mathematics, engineering or technology education 
projects disseminate complete information about the activities, 
progress outcomes and assessment of their projects via the 
Internet. The Committee expects that NSF will establish 
program-based web sites that will provide links to appropriate 
project-based or institutional web sites, and that information 
about undergraduate activities funded by the Research and 
Related Activities Directorates will also be included.

Section 10--Evaluation

    The Committee believes that evaluation of the outcomes and 
impact of undergraduate education activities is as important as 
the development and implementation of the activities 
themselves. However, evaluation and assessment have 
historically received less attention and funding that other 
sponsored activities. In many of the programs sponsored by 
NSF's Education and Human ResourcesDirectorate, the primary 
mechanism for review of projects is self-assessment, whereby the 
principal investigator for a grant, or a consultant hired by that 
investigator, conducts the assessment of a project's progress and 
results.
    Self-evaluation is an important part of the development and 
implementation process as it keeps the investigator's work 
aligned to the project goals and objectives and helps the 
investigator meet those goals, time deadlines, and budgetary 
constraints. On the other hand, self-evaluation or assessment 
can be narrow and biased toward positive results, is often 
times not a priority during the early development and 
implementation stages of the work, and frequently is given too 
little time and money. In addition, many superb educators and 
scientists lack any training in evaluation and assessment 
methodologies and may be poorly equipped to design and 
implement a comprehensive assessment plan or to interpret 
evaluative data.
    Funds requested for evaluation are frequently reduced 
during the NSF budget negotiation process and the size and 
duration of typical awards make it impossible to conduct an 
informative evaluation. A three-year grant rarely provides time 
for the implemented work to be refined or for positive results 
to be realized in improved student performance. As a result of 
these difficulties, much of the current project evaluation and 
assessment is heavily reliant on subjective measures such as 
attitudinal surveys or on uninformative data such as numbers of 
teacher or student participants. Assessment rarely includes 
performance-based evaluation, largely because the short 
duration of grants precludes the involvement of adequate 
numbers of students necessary to make the assessment relevant 
or valid.
    For these reasons, the Committee believes that it is very 
important for NSF to take a much more active role in project 
and program evaluation and to help investigators plan and 
execute valuable and informative assessments and evaluation. 
The Committee recognizes the expertise of NSF's Research, 
Evaluation, and Communication Division within the Education and 
Human Resources Directorate and calls on the Division to assist 
the Foundation in developing assessment benchmarks and tools 
that will enable sponsored investigators to improve their 
project-based assessment and evaluation activities and to 
provide data that is valuable to the Foundation for the purpose 
of comparative analysis and program evaluation. These 
benchmarks and tools should enable the Foundation to evaluate 
the effectiveness of all undergraduate education activities 
supported by all NSF directorates in increasing student 
enrollment and completion of science, mathematics, engineering 
and technology courses (for non-majors) and programs (for 
majors); student academic achievement; and placement in careers 
or advanced education following degree completion. Particularly 
promising projects should be subjected to extended evaluation, 
through supplemental funding or an award to an independent 
evaluative organization, to enable long-term evaluation of the 
project's activities and impact.
    The Committee does not expect NSF to develop assessment 
instruments or tests that will be used to assess student 
performance. Rather, NSF should enable project managers to 
collect the data and implement the performance benchmarks and 
tools that will allow a retrospective determination of ``what 
works'' and provide a cumulative basis for best practices. The 
purpose of such assessment and evaluation is to provide 
feedback that will improve the system and inform others of 
successful approaches, and to begin establishing causal 
relationships between practices and outcomes. The Committee 
expects the Director to make the results of such evaluations 
public.

Section 11--National Academy of Sciences study on undergraduate 
        recruitment and retention

    The Committee believes that while there is much speculation 
about the reasons for declining enrollments in some areas of 
science while graduation rates are soaring in others, these 
justifications are largely speculative and lack grounding in 
research, and it is time to look more carefully at successful 
models to determine ``what works.'' Therefore, section 11 
requires the Directors to enter into an arrangement with the 
National Research Council to perform a study on the factors 
that influence undergraduate students to enter, and persist to 
degree completion in science, mathematics, engineering and 
technology programs or to leave such programs and matriculate 
to other academic programs, or to leave college altogether. The 
Committee expects that student reported data regarding reasons 
for declaring an interest in, for persisting to degree 
completion, or for exiting a program in science, mathematics, 
engineering and technology be utilized in generating the 
report.

Section 12--Minority-serving institutions undergraduate program

    The Committee recognizes that the size and quality of the 
scientific and engineering workforce could be expanded 
significantly if the largely untapped population of 
underrepresented minority students were engaged in high-quality 
science, mathematics, engineering or technology programs. 
Population projections indicate that the number of white males 
entering the higher education pipeline will decline after 2010 
while the number of minority students and women will continue 
to increase. The program established under section 12 is 
specifically aimed at enhancing the quality of undergraduate 
science, mathematics, and engineering education at minority-
serving institutions including Hispanic-Serving Institutions, 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Alaska Native-
Serving Institutions, Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, and 
tribally controlled colleges and universities. The Committee 
expects that grants awarded under this program will be used: 
(1) to improve courses and curricular materials; (2) for 
faculty development including faculty sabbatical and exchange 
opportunities in research and technological advancement; (3) 
for professional development workshops on effective teaching 
practices and assessment; (4) to support visiting faculty 
including researchers from industry; (5) to allow faculty 
release time for the purpose of mentoring students or 
participation in curriculum reform or academic enhancement 
activities; and (6) for stipends for undergraduate students 
participating in academic or industry research activities.

Section 13--Advanced technological education program

    The Committee recognizes the important contributions 
community colleges make toward training students in technical 
fields, in providing associate's degree programs in science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology, and in preparing 
students for transfer to four-year collegeswhere they will earn 
baccalaureate degrees in science, mathematics, and engineering. In 
addition, many students who will become pre-K through 8th grade 
teachers start their education at a community college. The nation's 
1,600 two-year institutions educate nearly 5.5 million students and 
award approximately 550,000 associates degrees annually, with only 
approximately 30,000 of those degrees awarded in the science and 
engineering areas. However, these statistics can be misleading, as many 
community colleges provide strong science and engineering education to 
students who transfer to four-year colleges and universities prior to 
completing the associate's degree. The Committee is concerned that 
little data exists on the role community colleges play in the 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering and technology 
enterprise, particularly with respect to community college students who 
ultimately earn baccalaureate degrees in science, mathematics, 
engineering or education. Therefore, the Committee encourages NSF to 
collect more information on community colleges as part of the National 
Survey of College Graduates.
    NSF, in accordance with the Scientific and Advanced-
Technology Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 1862i(a)), established a 
highly successful program, the ATE Program, that has 
facilitated the training of thousands of highly skilled 
technical workers through a variety of projects and 16 Centers 
of Excellence and Large-Scale Dissemination Projects. Given the 
success of the ATE program in increasing the number and quality 
of technical workers, the Committee believes that this program 
could make equal or greater contributions to the core science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology courses offered to 
students enrolled in associate's degree or transfer programs in 
these areas. Therefore, the Committee amended the 1992 Act to 
authorize activities for the improvement of core education 
courses in science and mathematics, including courses in 
engineering science and computer technology, which are required 
for students transferring to a four-year institution to pursue 
baccalaureate degrees. In addition, the Committee has 
explicitly authorized appropriations for instrumentation under 
the ATE program to encourage NSF to increase the allocation of 
resources allowed for the acquisition of state-of-the-art 
instrumentation through grants awarded under the ATE Program as 
an important contributor to improving science and technology 
courses. The Committee understands that these courses serve a 
wide variety of students including science, mathematics and 
engineering majors, non-majors, and teacher education majors. 
By improving the science and mathematics course work available 
to students at community colleges, the Committee feels that 
students who attend community colleges will have a higher 
degree of scientific and mathematics literacy, and will pursue 
and be successful in science, mathematics and engineering 
majors.
    The Committee strongly favors the creation and 
strengthening of bridge programs that facilitate the transition 
of students from community college to four-year institutions, 
as supported by the Articulation Partnerships authorized by the 
Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992. Testimony from 
the Committee's March 7, 2002 hearing showed that including 
community college students in undergraduate research 
experiences at four-year institutions has an enormous impact on 
both the likelihood that the community college student would 
ultimately transfer to a four-year institution to earn a degree 
in science, and on the likelihood that the student would pursue 
higher education in science following completion of the 
baccalaureate degree. For this reason, the Articulation 
Partnerships section of the 1992 Act is amended to authorize 
support for students participating in research experiences at 
undergraduate institutions and support for faculty mentors 
involved in those research activities.
    To ensure that the ATE Program is meeting the goals and 
objectives of the 1992 Act, the Committee instructs the 
Director to establish an advisory committee on science, 
mathematics, and technology education at community colleges 
composed of academic and industry representatives. The advisory 
committee may be constituted as a new committee or may be an 
extension of the Committee of Visitors already established for 
the ATE program as long as the membership and scope of work of 
the Committee of Visitors is consistent with section 13(c) of 
the bill. The role of the advisory committee is to review and 
assess the activities carried out under the ATE program 
including conformity of the program to the 1992 Act, the 
effectiveness of activities supported under the program in 
strengthening the science, mathematics and technical training 
capabilities of community colleges, the effectiveness of NSF 
and institutions supported under the program in disseminating 
information about activities carried out under the program, and 
the balance of resources allocated between national centers of 
excellence, individual projects, and articulation partnerships.

                           IX. Cost Estimate

    A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to 
the Committee on Science prior to the filing of this report and 
is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule 
XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
    H.R. 3130 does not contain new budget authority, credit 
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming 
that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 
3130 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as 
described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the 
bill, which is contained in Section X of this report.

              X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, June 4, 2002.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3130, the 
Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology 
Education Improvement Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Kathleen 
Gramp.
            Sincerely,
                                           Steven Lieberman
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3130--Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and 
        Technology Education Improvement Act of 2002

    Summary: H.R. 3130 would authorize various initiatives at 
the National Science Foundation (NSF) related to undergraduate 
education in science, math, engineering, and technology. The 
bill would authorize grants to academic institutions and 
nonprofit entities for programs that would increase the number 
of undergraduates pursuing scientific degrees, expand research 
opportunities for undergraduate students, develop faculty, 
implement certain institutional reforms, and improve access to 
research instrumentation at certain universities. In addition, 
H.R. 3130 would direct NSF to establish a special grant program 
for institutions that serve minority students, including 
Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities (HBCUs), and tribally controlled colleges and 
universities. Finally, NSF would be required to fund a study by 
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) on students' 
perspectives on why they would or would not pursue an 
undergraduate degree in these fields.
    Assuming appropriations of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing this bill would cost a total of 
$500 million over the 2003-2007 period. The bill would not 
affect direct spending or receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures 
would not apply.
    H.R. 3130 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. The bill would benefit public universities and 
community colleges by authorizing grant programs to increase 
the number of U.S. students obtaining degrees in nonmedical 
science and technology. Any costs incurred by public 
investments and community colleges would be voluntary.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 3130 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 250 
(general science, space, and technology).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
                                                              2002     2003     2004     2005     2006     2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Estimated Authorization Level.............................        0      145      147      149      151      154
Estimated Outlays.........................................        0       17       81      123      136      142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
necessary amounts would be appropriated near the beginning of 
each fiscal year and that outlays will follow the pattern of 
existing education programs at NSF. Unless otherwise specified 
in the bill, CBO assumes that funding levels would be adjusted 
annually for inflation.
    H.R. 3130 would specify funding levels for some--but not 
all--of NSF's educational activities. The bill would direct NSF 
to establish at least 10 ``talent expansion'' centers that 
would focus on increasing the number of undergraduates in 
scientific fields and would authorize $25 million for 2003 and 
such sums as may be necessary thereafter for the centers. It 
also would authorize about $53 million for fiscal years 2003 
through 2007 for grants for certain reforms at educational 
institutions, faculty development, instrumentation, 
undergraduate research opportunities, and certain existing 
programs focused on improving the quality of undergraduate 
education.
    In addition, CBO estimates that H.R. 3130 would authorize 
an average of $70 million a year for grants to institutions 
serving minority students. NSF expects to spend a total of $27 
million in 2002 for grants to HBCUs and tribally controlled 
colleges and universities, which includes institutions serving 
Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. CBO estimates that 
expanding this program to include Hispanic-Serving Institutions 
would cost another $40 million in 2003 if the level of support 
is similar to that provided to the other institutions. Finally, 
the estimated funding for 2003 includes $700,000 authorized by 
the bill for a NAS study.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: 
H.R. 3130 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. The bill would benefit public universities as well 
as community colleges by authorizing grant programs to increase 
the number of U.S. students obtaining degrees in nonmedical 
science and technology. Any costs incurred by public 
universities and community colleges would be voluntary.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill contains 
no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Kathleen Gramp; Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Government: Elyse Goldman; and 
Impact on the Private Sector: Patrice Gordon.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                  XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 3130 contains no unfunded mandates.

         XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    The Committee on Science's oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

      XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives

    Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of 
H.R. 3130 are to improve undergraduate science, mathematics, 
engineering and technology education for all students and to 
increase the number of graduates of programs in those areas.
    The Committee requires that all of the programs authorized 
under the Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering and 
Technology Education Improvement Act be awarded on a 
competitive, merit-review process. This process is expected to 
ensure that only those projects that hold the most promise for 
increasing the number and quality of graduates of science, 
mathematics, engineering or technology programs and for 
increasing the quality of undergraduate science, mathematics, 
engineering and technology education will receive funding. 
While increasing the number of science and engineering 
graduates is the primary goal of this Act, it is imperative 
that the rigor of the undergraduate program and quality of 
graduates not be compromised simply in the interest of 
increased numbers. Rather, all efforts to increase student 
enrollment should be supported with parallel efforts to improve 
the quality of each student's undergraduate science, 
mathematics, engineering and technology experience.
    The decades-long engagement in undergraduate education 
reform has highlighted the need to engage undergraduate 
students in productive interactions with faculty through 
research experiences and mentoring programs, yet the mechanisms 
by which these activities are most effectively introduced 
remain largely unclear. The precise factors that lead to a 
student's decision to pursue or persist in a science or 
engineering degree program, or to transfer out of such a 
program are also not well understood. For those reasons, this 
Act requires that all of NSF-funded undergraduate science, 
mathematics, engineering, and technology education projects and 
programs be subjected to rigorous assessment and evaluation 
such that a national clearinghouse of best practices for 
increasing student enrollment, persistence and achievement 
evolves.

                XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 3130.

                XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement

    The functions of the advisory committee established by H.R. 
3130 are not currently being nor could they be performed by one 
or more agencies or by enlarging the mandate of another 
existing advisory committee.

                 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act

    The Committee finds that H.R. 3130 does not relate to the 
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services 
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of 
the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).

      XVII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law

    This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or 
tribal law.

      XVIII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

    SECTION 3 OF THE SCIENTIFIC AND ADVANCED-TECHNOLOGY ACT OF 1992


SEC. 3. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION.

  (a) National Advanced Scientific and Technical Education 
Program.--The Director of the National Science Foundation 
(hereafter in this Act referred to as the ``Director'') shall 
award grants to associate-degree-granting colleges, and 
consortia thereof, to assist them in providing education in 
advanced-technology fields, and to improve the quality of their 
core education courses in science and mathematics. The grant 
program shall place emphasis on the needs of students who have 
been in the workforce (including work in the home), and shall 
be designed to strengthen and expand the scientific and 
technical education and training capabilities of associate-
degree-granting colleges through such methods as--
          (1) the development of model instructional programs 
        in advanced-technology fields and in core science and 
        mathematics courses;
          (2) the professional development of faculty and 
        instructors, both full- and part-time, [in advanced-
        technology fields] who provide instruction in science, 
        mathematics, and advanced-technology fields;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Articulation Partnerships.--
          (1) Partnership grants.--(A) * * *
          (B) Each eligible partnership receiving a grant under 
        this paragraph shall, at a minimum--
                  (i) counsel students, including students who 
                have been in the workforce (including work in 
                the home), about the requirements and course 
                offerings of the bachelor-degree-granting 
                institution; [and]
                  (ii) conduct workshops and orientation 
                sessions to ensure that students are familiar 
                with programs, including laboratories and 
                financial aid programs, at the bachelor-degree-
                granting institution[.];
                  (iii) provide students with research 
                experiences at bachelor-degree-granting 
                institutions participating in the partnership, 
                including stipend support for students 
                participating in summer programs; and
                  (iv) provide faculty mentors for students 
                participating in activities under clause (iii), 
                including summer salary support for faculty 
                mentors.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     XIX. Committee Recommendations

    On May 22, 2002, a quorum being present, the Committee on 
Science favorably reported the Undergraduate Science, 
Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education Improvement 
Act, by a voice vote, and recommended its enactment.

                XX. Exchange of Committee Correspondence

                              Committee on Science,
                                  House of Representatives,
                                      Washington, DC, June 5, 2002.
Hon. John Boehner,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, Rayburn House 
        Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Boehner: Thank you for your letter of June 5, 
2002, regarding H.R. 3130, the ``Technology Talent Act of 
2001,'' which was referred to the Committee on Science and in 
addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and 
ordered favorably by this Committee on May 22, 2002. I 
appreciate your willingness to refrain from holding a hearing 
or markup on H.R. 3130 in order to have this legislation 
considered expeditiously by the House.
    I agree that waiver of consideration by your Committee does 
not prejudice the Education and the Workforce Committee's 
jurisdictional interest and prerogatives on this or any similar 
legislation and it will not be considered as precedent for 
consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to your 
Committee in the future. I will support your request to the 
Speaker for the appointment of conferees from your Committee 
with respect to matters within the jurisdiction of your 
Committee should a conference with the Senate be convened on 
this or similar legislation.
    I will include our exchange of letters in the Science 
Committee's report to accompany H.R. 3130. Thank you for your 
cooperation on this issue.
            Sincerely,
                                      Sherwood L. Boehlert,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

          Committee on Education and the Workforce,
                                  House of Representatives,
                                      Washington, DC, June 5, 2002.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Boehlert: Thank you for working with me 
regarding H.R. 3130, the ``Technology Talent Act of 2001'', 
which was referred to the Committee on Science and in addition 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and ordered 
favorably reported by your Committee on May 22, 2002. I 
understand your desire to have this legislation considered 
expeditiously by the House; hence, I do not intend to hold a 
hearing or markup on this legislation.
    In agreeing to waive consideration by our Committee, I 
would expect you to agree that this procedural route should not 
be construed to prejudice the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce's jurisdictional interest and prerogatives on this or 
any similar legislation and will not be considered as precedent 
for consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my 
Committee in the future. I would also expect your support in my 
request to the Speaker for the appointment of conferees from my 
Committee with respect to matters within the jurisdiction of my 
Committee should a conference with the Senate be convened on 
this or similar legislation.
    I would appreciate your including our exchange of letters 
in your Committee's report to accompany H.R. 3130, which I 
understand you intend to file this week. Again, I thank you for 
working with me in developing this legislation and I look 
forward to working with you on these issues in the future.
            Sincerely,
                                              John Boehner,
                                                          Chairman.