Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Equity in K-12 STEM Education Framing Decisions for the Future Eileen R. Parsons, Kenne A. Dibner, and Heidi Schweingruber, Editors Committee on Equity in PreK-12 STEM Education Board on Science Education Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Consensus Study Report Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Sciences Thomas Lincoln Casey Fund, National Academy of Sciences W.K. Kellogg, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NNH17CB02B/80HQTR21F0122), National Science Foundation (DRL-2113927), Samueli Foundation (unnumbered), William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (2019-9355 and 2021-3252), and William T. Grant Foundation (201386). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26859 This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2024 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Equity in K-12 STEM Education: Framing Decisions for the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26859. Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committeeâs deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
COMMITTEE ON EQUITY IN PREKâ12 STEM EDUCATION EILEEN R. PARSONS (Chair), Professor Emerita of Science Education, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill MEGAN E. BANG, Professor of Learning Sciences and Psychology, Northwestern University COURTNEY A. BELL, Professor of Learning Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison MARTA CIVIL, Professor, University of Arizona GUDIEL R. CROSTHWAITE, Superintendent, Lynwood Unified School District, Lynwood, California MAISIE L. GHOLSON, Associate Professor, University of Michigan STEFANIE L. MARSHALL, Assistant Professor, Michigan State University WILLIAM R. PENUEL, Professor of Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of Colorado-Boulder THOMAS PHILIP, Professor, University of California-Berkeley CATHERINE RIEGLE-CRUMB, Professor of STEM Education, University of Texas at Austin JEAN RYOO, Director of Research, UCLA Computer Science Equity Project SHAWN SHEEHAN, Assistant Principal, Lewisville Independent School District, Lewisville, Texas CARRIE TZOU, Professor of Science Education, University of Washington-Bothell SEPEHR VAKIL, Associate Professor, Northwestern University SHIRIN VOSSOUGHI, Associate Professor of Learning Sciences, Northwestern University CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT, Associate Professor in Science Education, Drexel University Study Staff KENNE A. DIBNER, Study Director LETICIA GARCILAZO GREEN, Associate Program Officer BRITTANI SHORTER, Senior Program Assistant TIFFANY E. TAYLOR, Senior Program Officer HEIDI SCHWEINGRUBER, Board Director, Board on Science Education Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs v
BOARD ON SCIENCE EDUCATION SUSAN R. SINGER (Chair), Vice President for Academic Affairs, Provost, Rollins College SUE ALLEN, Senior Research Scientist, Maine Mathematics and Science Alliance MEGAN BANG, Professor of Learning Sciences and Psychology, Northwestern University VICKI L. CHANDLER, Provost, Minerva Schools at Keck Graduate Institute KIRSTEN ELLENBOGEN, President and CEO, Great Lakes Science Center MAYA M. GARCIA, Science Content Specialist, Colorado Department of Education DAVID GOLDSTON, Director, MIT Washington Office G. PETER LAPAGE, Andrew H. and James S. Tisch Distinguished University Professor of Physics, Emeritus, Cornell University WILLIAM PENUEL, Professor of Learning Sciences and Human Development, University of Colorado Boulder STEPHEN L. PRUITT, President, Southern Regional Education Board K. RENAE PULLEN, Kâ6 Science Curriculum Instructional Specialist, Caddo Parish Schools, Louisiana K. ANN RENNINGER, Dorwin P. Cartwright Professor of Social Theory and Social Action, Swarthmore College FRANCISCO RODRIGUEZ, Chancellor, Los Angeles Community College District MARCY H. TOWNS, Bodner-Honig Professor of Chemistry, Purdue University DARRYL N. WILLIAMS, Senior Vice President, Science and Education, The Franklin Institute Staff HEIDI SCHWEINGRUBER, Director Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs vi
About the Cover Facing the Future Oil/mixed media created by Joseph Holston In keeping with the messages in this report, the image on the cover depicts two young Black girls admiring the painting entitled Facing the Future. This painting was created for the Jacob Lawrence Migration Series entitled And the Migrants Keep Coming. The artists featured in this series were asked âto share a work that builds upon Jacob Lawrenceâs visual narrative while illuminating the rich tapestry of the migration experience.â In Holstonâs work, he depicts the following message: What does it take for meâblack boy, black girlâto get ahead, when even at home every kid in the world is my competition? My ancestors escaped slavery, migrated northâfor a chance at a better life. But I still am left behind. Weak schools? Poverty? Racism? In an ever-churning global talent pool, I still struggle to be seen. Everybody has a story. More of us than ever are searching for that elusive better life. Itâs still just out of reach. I will stay focused. I will do what I have to do. These two Black girls also have a story to be written. Representative of young people worldwide, these girls and their peers deserve opportunity, resources, and access to a STEM education worthy of their promise. The Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 STEM Education wishes to extend its sincere gratitude to Joseph and Sharon Holston for their permission in sharing this painting with us, and the world. The committee also thanks Jordyn White and her daughters, Aryn and Ryan, for their participation in creating this cover image. Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs vii
Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
Reviewers This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: DEBORAH LOWENBERG BALL, Marsal Family School of Education, University of Michigan ANGELA M. CALABRESE-BARTON, Educational Studies, Marsal Family School of Education, University of Michigan BRYAN BROWN, Graduate School of Education, Stanford University SHAFIQ CHAUDHARY, New Mexico Public Education Department ELLEN W. CLAYTON, Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center ANTERO GARCIA, Graduate School of Education, Stanford University KRISTIN L. GUNCKEL, Teaching, Learning & Sociocultural Studies, University of Arizona ANANDA M. MARIN, School of Education & Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles LEVI PATRICK, Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by JACQUELINE JONES, President & CEO (Retired), Foundation for Child Development, and EVE J. HIGGINBOTHAM, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs ix
Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
Acknowledgments The Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 STEM Education was tasked with authoring a report that provides both immediate and long-term guidance for educators, policymakers, and other stakeholders looking to support equity in PreKâ12 STEM education. To achieve this task, this committee took on the herculean responsibility of synthesizing myriad bodies of literature to support the development of meaningful recommendations. A number of individuals devoted time and energy to advancing this work, and we owe a sincere debt of gratitude to all involved. First, we wish to extend a thank you to our phenomenal sponsors for their willingness to support this project. In particular, we thank Angela DeBarger of the Hewlett Foundation, whose early sponsorship of this project was a signal to the field that this report could have value. We also thank Jolene Jesse of the National Science Foundation, Kristen Erickson and Lin Chambers of NASA, Michelle Freeman of the Samueli Foundation, and Jenny Irons of the W.T. Grant Foundation. We are profoundly grateful for their support. We also wish to extend our thanks for the contributions of the many scholars who presented to the committee so that we might bring in outside expertise: your insights were invaluable, and each presentation informed our thinking in some way. In particular, we extend our sincere gratitude to Michael Lach, Superintendent of Hinsdale Township High School District 86 in Illinois, who offered deeply constructive feedback on an early draft. The committee wishes to extend its gratitude to the staff of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE), in particular to Heidi Schweingruber, director of the Board on Science Education, who is quick to roll up her sleeves in pursuit of the highest quality report, and who helmed much of the work necessary to bring the report to fruition. To Leticia Garcilazo Green, who in her capacity as an associate program officer has contributed her inestimable expertise to every facet of this project from start to finish. She is both a valued thought partner and a trusted colleague, and the definition of a joy to work with. To Tiffany Taylor, whose early leadership and planning of our Regional Expert Consultation events allowed for unparalleled insight into how equity in STEM education looks in practice, and who passed the baton to Janet Gao for her later leadership of those visits. To Brittani Shorter, whose administrative leadership smoothed the way for this report. Kirsten Sampson Snyder of the DBASSE staff deftly guided us through the National Academies review process, and Laura Yoder provided invaluable editorial assistance. Bea Porter of the DBASSE staff oversaw the production of the report. Finally, the committee wishes to thank Dr. Eileen Parsons, study chair, for her leadership of a complex project. Dr. Parsons was tasked with the considerable challenge of bringing multiple, often conflicting perspectives toward shared understanding. Her unyielding patience and thoughtfulness set the tone for our eventual work, and we are thoroughly grateful for her service to this committee. It is impossible to overstate how much care and effort went into producing this report. We are profoundly grateful to everyone who had hands on bringing it into the world. It is our sincere hope that our final product serves the needs of the legions of tireless educators in their ongoing efforts to provide high quality STEM learning experiences for all students. Kenne A. Dibner, Study Director Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 STEM Education Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xi
Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
Contents Preface xix Summary Chapter 1 Introduction INTERPRETING AND ADDRESSING THE COMMITTEE'S CHARGE UNDERSTANDING EQUITY STEM EDUCATION SALIENT CONTEXTUAL ISSUES: WHY NOW? THE COMMITTEE'S SHARED VALUES AND POSITIONALITY ABOUT THIS REPORT REFERENCES Chapter 2 History, Equity, and STEM Education KEY FACTORS IN THE HISTORY OF U.S. EDUCATION RELATED TO EQUITY BRIEF HISTORY OF STEM EDUCATION CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 3 Key Elements of the United States Education System THE NESTED LAYERS OF THE U.S. EDUCATION SYSTEM HOW POLICY OPERATES ACROSS THE EDUCATION SYSTEM BEYOND FORMAL SCHOOLING CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 4 An Overview of Broad Patterns of Inequality in PreKâ12 STEM Educational Outcomes DATA RELATED TO ACHIEVEMENT TEST SCORES DIFFERENCES IN ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN STEM CONTENT IN K-12 SCHOOLS INEQUITIES IN INSTRUCTION AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENT AND TEACHER LEARNING INEQUITIES OF OPPORTUNITY IN OUT-OF-SCHOOL LEARNING TOWARD NEW SYSTEMS FOR ASSESSING THE STATE OF STEM EDUCATION CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 5 Children and Youth Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xiii
CENTERING THE PERSPECTIVES OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH ILLUMINATING BARRIERS TO EQUITABLE STEM EDUCATION STORIES, MESSAGES, AND MYTHS IN STEM CHILDREN'S RESOURCES FOR LEARNING AND HOW THEY ARE VALUED CHILDREN AS CULTURAL AND POLITICAL ACTORS IN STEM SOCIAL STRUCTURES AND POWER IN STEM EDUCATION A NOTE ON TEACHERS AND SIGNIFICANT ADULTS IN SUPPORTING EQUITY IN CHILDREN'S WORLDS TOWARD AN ECOLOGICALLY COMPLEX, CHILD-CENTERED EQUITY IN STEM EDUCATION CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 6 Approaches to Equity Through the Lens of Decision Making: Five Frames CONDITIONS OF DECISION MAKING IN STEM: CONSEQUENCES OF THE PAST, CURRENT REALITIES AND POSSIBLE FUTURES FIVE FRAMES FOR DECISION MAKING FOR EQUITY IN STEM EDUCATION USING FRAMES TO PROMOTE EQUITY AND JUSTICE IN STEM EDUCATION ANTI-EQUITY AND NON-EQUITY FRAMES HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS OF STRATEGIC FRAMING IN ACTION CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 7 Learning in STEM DEFICIT PERSPECTIVES AND LEARNING IN SCHOOL PARADIGM SHIFTS IN CONCEPTIONS OF HUMAN LEARNING EXPANDING IDEAS ABOUT LEARNING IN THE STEM DISCLIPINES IN SCHOOL TRANSFORMING LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES IN STEM CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 8 Teaching for Equity in STEM WHAT CAN EQUITY-ORIENTED TEACHING LOOK LIKE? SUPPORTING EQUITY-ORIENTED TEACHING THROUGH PEDAGOGICAL MODELS SHIFTING INSTRUCTION IN A COMPLEX SYSTEM CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 9 Developing Teaching Practices Toward Equity COMPETENCIES FOR TEACHING TOWARD EQUIITY IN STEM TEACHER LEARNING OVER TIME AND ACROSS CONTEXTS STRUCTURES THAT SUPPORT TEACHERS' LEARNING IN SCHOOLS TEACHING PRACTICE DEVELOPS WITHIN COMPLEX SYSTEMS Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xiv
CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 10 Instructional Materials, Time and Resources INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS AND EQUITY IN STEM EDUCATION TIME AND RESOURCES CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 11 Supporting Equitable Pathways in STEM Learning WHAT ARE STEM PATHWAYS? WHAT SHAPES PATHWAYS? HOW CAN DISTRICT, SCHOOL, AND COMMUNITY LEADERS EXPAND PATHWAYS? CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Chapter 12 Vision, Recommendations, and Future Research RECOMMENDATIONS RESEARCH FOR AN EQUITABLE STEM FUTURE TOWARD A MORE JUST AND EQUITABLE FUTURE Appendix A Testimony Before the Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 Education Appendix B Regional Expert Consultations Appendix C Committee-Commissioned Papers Appendix D Committee and Staff Biographies Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xv
Boxes, Figures, Tables, and Vignettes BOXES 1-1 Statement of Task, 1-3 1-2 Report Glossary, 1-18 2-1 Confronting the Troubling History of the United States, 2-2 4-1 Patterns of Segregation by Income and Race, 4-5 4-2 Students with Disabilities, 4-8 4-3 Inequities in Rural Settings, 4-16 6-1 Four Approaches to Equity in Science and Engineering in Preschool through Elementary Grades (2022), 6-6 7-1 How Research on Learning and Academic Achievement Has Reinforced Deficit Perspectives, 7-2 7-2 Learning Together: Jason & Jackie, 7-6 7-3 Do Plants Grow Every Day?, 7-15 7-4 Water is Life, 7-18 8-1 Pedagogical Models for Equitable STEM Instruction, 8-9 8-2 Developing Culturally Responsive Assessments for High School Physics, 8-13 8-3 Wright and Delgadoâs Six Constructs of Gender and Sexual Diversity in STEM Education (2023), 8-16 9-1 Developing Interpretive Power to See and Value Studentsâ Ideas in Elementary Science, 9-9 9-2 The Family Leadership Design Collaborative, 9-14 10-1 How Instructional Materials are Adopted Across All 50 States, 10-5 10-2 EdReports Review Criteria with Connections to Equity, 10-7 10-3 Selected Tools and Resources for Selecting Culturally Responsive and Sustaining Instructional Materials, 10-8 10-4 Technological Resources: Why Access is Not Enough to Achieve Equity, 10-17 11-1 Potential Actions to Address Inequities in Advanced Coursework, 11-9 11-2 Catalyzing Change in School Mathematics from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: Key Recommendations, 11-10 11-3 External Partnerships: Connecting Youth to Communities, 11-16 Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xvi
FIGURES 3-1 The layers of governance and policy domains of the U.S. education system, 3-5 7-1 Life-long and life-wide learning, 7-9 9-1 Justice-centered ambitious science teaching, 9-4 9-2 The four principles of connective and productive disciplinary engagement, 9-5 TABLES 5-1 Themes of Discouragement when Engaging in STEM Contexts, 5-20 6-1 Summary of Key Features of Gap Closing Frame, 6-9 6-2 Summary of Key Features of Expanding Opportunity Frame, 6-11 6-3 Summary of Key Features of Embracing Heterogeneity Frame, 6-13 6-4 Summary of Key Features of the Justice Frame, 6-15 6-5 Summary of Key Features of the Envisioning New Futures Frame, 6-18 8-1 Gender and Sexual Diversity Inclusive STEM Education Constructs, 8-16 10-1 Factors Shaping Teachersâ Adaptations of Curriculum Materials, 10-4 10-2 Guiding Questions for Curriculum Materials Based on Equity-Focused Approaches to Learning, 10-11 10-3 Frequence with which Self-Contained Elementary Teachers Teach Science and Mathematics, by Subject, 10-15 10-4 Availability of Instructional Resources in Science Classes, by HUS Quartile, 10-15 10-5 Availability of Laboratory Facilities in Science Classes, by HUS Quartile, 10-16 10-6 Adequacy of Resources for Mathematics Instruction, by HUS Quartile, 10-16 VIGNETTES 1 Akshay, 5-8 2 James, 5-9 3 Jahnay, 5-12 4 Ernesto and Corrine, 5-12 5 Jack, Allurah, Diamond, Jonathon, Iris, and Tariq, 5-14 6 Nikki, 5-16 7 Jakeel and Rebecca, 5-17 8 Arthur and Robert, 5-19 9 Ginny, 5-22 Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xvii
Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs
Preface Consensus committees at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are firmly bound to addressing a short but instructive Statement of Task. These directives are designed to help committees seek out and assess evidence on particular topics. Statements of Task narrow the committeeâs attention by establishing parameters for its work, and by influencing how a committee gathers evidence, engages with the field, and constructs its eventual report. Committees are asked to address the statement of task but not go beyond it. For the purposes of generating actionable recommendations, they are obliged to consider the available scholarly and practice evidence in a field, making judgments on what is relevant, and synthesize what is known (and not known) in a given arena. The task at hand for the Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 STEM Education was complex, given that an agreed upon and common understanding of what equity is does not exist in practice, policy, or research. Although the sociopolitical contexts of 2020 (in which the charge and the composition of the committee were established) and the sociopolitical contexts of 2023 (in which the committeeâs work neared completion) were quite different, these differences did not impact the evidence collected and assessed. However, the changing conditions around equity did amplify the complexities of developing actionable recommendations for diverse stakeholders. Meeting the charge laid out before us turned out to be extremely challenging. As we began our work together, numerous questions emerged; some directly related to equity and some that seemed to be equity adjacent. In a report that is not a living, dynamic document and that must have a final page to conclude it, which questions get addressed, to what degree, and why these questions and not others? How does a report required to examine evidence convey such evidence to diverse audiences with varying and conflicting views on equity? Because a general consensus around equity did not exist within the Committee at the outset, who decides what warrants inclusion, and whose voices are elevated and validated? What recommendations can the Committee make that have some probability of being taken up at significant scale and substantive ways when equity is under attack, as it has been for most of the nationâs existence? How does the expert Committee address a topic that is critical to the nation, essential to its democratic ideals, and crucial to its present and future progress and prosperity? Managing a host of contentions, like those insinuated in the previously articulated questions, the Committee wholeheartedly engaged the charge, broaching it from diverse and sometimes opposing perspectives, but finding commonality in our passion for and belief in equity and a more equitable system of STEM education in the U.S. for the nationâs children and youth. Despite the challenge of addressing this Statement of Task, the resulting consensus study was made possible by the unwavering commitment of the Committee, the generosity of researchers and practitioners who discussed their insights with the Committee, the selfless sharing of the communities the Committee visited, and the exemplary support provided by the National Academies. The 18-month process involved reviewing and examining various types of evidence, considering conceptual frameworks and theories, and engaging with and responding to Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xix
a range of voices on equity as it is experienced by human beings in preKâ12 STEM education. In this report, the Committee entertains equity across time horizons of past, present, and future; considers action on equity from the vantage points of short-term, mid-term, and long-term; and contemplates equity from various loci (individuals, communities, institutions, and systems). The Committee made difficult choices in attending to the complexities of equity in preKâ12 STEM education with the desire for the consensus study to catalyze more substantive and enduring action around equity. Undoubtedly, actions that steer the constellations of policies, practices, and people impacting childrenâs and youthâs STEM educational experiences towards greater equity are always difficult, especially in the current climate. The past and present show that equity work is imperative for a better future, but progress is plausible only if we persist. Eileen R. Parsons, Chair Committee on Equity in PreKâ12 STEM Education Prepublication copy, Uncorrected proofs xx
