I absolutely hate how everyone overlooks the biggest problem with public education today. To hell with improving math and science scores! The real issue is the fact that public schools are funded based on property tax. Schools in poor neighborhoods have no chance of improving basic building conditions let alone developing a more rigorous curriculum. There are schools still burning coal for heat in open burners and children walking from classroom to classroom in a foot of standing water using textbooks 3 decades old. Meanwhile, suburban communities have so much money for education they almost don't know what to do with it. If we ever expect children to compete on a "level playing field" for college and jobs we should give them all a decent start regardless of what community they were born into. We should abolish the connection between property tax and education funding!

:Sarah Fausett
Education funds are not based directly on the regional property taxes. Those taxes supplement what schools receive on a state and federal level. Also, living in the state that has the dubious honor of lowest spending per student (Utah) I can honestly say that NONE of our schools are heated using open burners, and I'm unaware of any cases of antiquated textbooks.

I'm skeptical of all of these generic fixes for the sad state of science and engineering. I see only propoganda at work - there are no solutions here. HOW will he encourage more students to finish degrees in engineering? HOW will he encourage them to go on to graduate degrees? HOW will he ensure that all teachers are "qualified" and their curricula "engaging"? Based on the empty promises of No Child Left Behind, I'm less than hopeful.

American students avoid science & engineering careers because they aren't viewed as wealthy careers. Particularly science careers, the amount of eduction vs salary is pitiful. 10+ years of higher education for 35K is a bad deal. PhD's cannot afford to even have families, no wonder american kids aren't going to graduate school.

Engineers have less of a problem in this regard as engineering jobs pay significantly more than science careers.

I graduated from Washington State University (WSU) with a Mechanical Engineering in 1993.

The economy was in the tank so I went back to get a second degree in Computer Science.

I left before finishing my CS degree in order to work at NeXT and later Apple.

I'm attempting to conjoin both educations and do my own startup while consulting on the side. I left before I could have cashed in on the windfall or I'd have just retired. I'm starting from scratch.

There has never been a lack of engineers available to do work. Many of us in the traditional fields of mechanical, electrical, chemical, civil [far less hurt by the downturns of the 90s from traditional engineering because everyone needs city planning and roads/sewers, etc], material science and more had to switch careers before they started or were just starting.

We don't have a lack of talent. We seem to lack a lot of jobs being available. Let me explain:

We recent graduates were caught in a catch 22. We graduated with not the minimum 5 years of engineering work experience [a door to block many from moving forward and absolutely artificial in nature], regardless of EIT or MS on our titles. We switched and had to start from the ground up in other fields only to be massively overskilled.

We return and we are once again, unqualified because we need "senior engineers."

America has massive resources of engineering talents. Many of them are building houses, painting houses, now plumbers, electricians and more because the industry always wants a bit more than they claim.

This is a great bait and switch. By doing this they can claim we don't have on-shore talent and will go hire, entry-level talent, at a fraction of the wage.

They are willing to import at exorbitant wages [> $100k] from Western Europe and reclassify it under accounting as an expense they can partially right down.

I'm thinking of getting a masters in engineering management, not for the hope I'll get a job in Mechanical Engineering [ASME is a great organization and I'm a proud member], but to give myself more financial/project education for my own projects.

My respect for this nation respecting those of us who went for challenging careers has bottomed out.

You won't stop the bait and switch approach to corporate greed unless we actual endorse high standards for business similar to those we put for hard science careers.

The IT Industry would have been a disaster without IEEE, ISO and more to focus on advancement through interoperability standards.

Microsoft is the bastard cousin of IBM before it got it's reign stolen by that cousin.

To have a debate on the scientific validity of scientific theories that include Evolution, in the 21st century shows me how medieval the US has become.

Unless we can make trillions from a scientific idea it doesn't get the respect it deserves.

If one of the US Presidential candidates concerned itself with restoring the US Infrastructure then I'd be hopeful about traditional engineering jobs in the US stimulating greater university enrollments for such careers.

If we dumb down the curriculum we might as well all just sit on our porch couches, watch the cars drive buy and drink ourselves to oblivion.

As a middle school science teacher and then a science consultant for a state run educational service center, I discovered that students had a real love for science in their early years because teaches were able to excite them with activity-based lessons. At about third or fourth grade many students lost interest because they went from doing science to reading about it. Those who were not developmentally ready, lost interest due also to teachers who did not like science either (mainly because the teachers' backgrounds and interests had been poor and dulled during their educational careers). We continue to perpetuate this problem and so science and math get poorly taught early and are then dumbed down later. As possible proof of this, Illinois science scores went up a few years ago even though they were not rerquired as part of the assessment of school's annual yearly progress. It appears that reading comprehension helped the students respond better to the state's multiple-choice assessment of science. Many administrators told elementary teachers to skip science and teach reading and math instead. Once again, the ignorance of science was expressed by these administrators and teachers who did not realize that reading research, technical writing, and math are an integral part of a good science program and when taught together and properly, students learn to love science and math.

More substantial answers to science related questions can be found on the science debate website.

You should reference these and ask your bloggers to pressure the McCain campaign for similarly detailed responses.