Science and Math by Armies of Uncertified Teachers, My Friends
I would have liked to see more science and technology issues discussed at the presidential debates, things like funding, education, and public policy. However, as we all know, the debates are not aimed at scientists, they're aimed at plumbers.1 So Acronym Required had low expectations for meaningful science discussions in the debates and rightly so. In the first two debates, even the word "science" got fleeting mention. It was inevitably paired with the words "research" or "scientists", or "important". Obama thrilled us because he said "science" three times in the second debate.
Republican John McCain also threw out a couple science key words, and managed to appeal to us as well as the science haters in his base. He trashed "bear research" as we previously discussed here, and he went on about the money wasted on "an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Illinois" -- not just in one debate, but in two. "My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?", he repeated Wednesday night, despite the constellation of criticism from scientists who already disproved his planetarium misrepresentations in the previous debate -- here, and here and here and elsewhere.
The word "science" got another incidental airing last night when Bob Schieffer posed this question:
"The U.S. spends more per capita than any other country on education. Yet, by every international measurement, in math and science competence, from kindergarten through the 12th grade, we trail most of the countries of the world. The implications of this are clearly obvious. Some even say it poses a threat to our national security. Do you feel that way and what do you intend to do about it?
Obama noted: "I think it's going to be critically important for us to recruit a generation of new teachers, an army of new teachers, especially in math and science...
And Have I a Job for You....
Continued Barack Obama:
"I meet young people all across the country who either have decided not to go to college or if they're going to college, they are taking on $20,000, $30,000, $50,000, $60,000 worth of debt, and it's very difficult for them to go into some fields, like basic research in science, for example, thinking to themselves that they're going to have a mortgage before they even buy a house..."
Times are tough if you're a scientist trying to find a job, or if you're trying to fund your lab. To Obama's point, if you scan available research jobs the pay offered often looks like a misprint. Here's one recent job from theChronicle of Higher Education:
"Chief Architect of the Genome Commons: Lead design, engineering, and deployment of the Genome Commons and Navigator. Develop and articulate a vision for using personal genomes to enhance human wellbeing."
Qualifications::
- Outstanding software architecture and development skills; proven ability to independently carry out a complex software engineering project.
- Understanding of human genetics.
- Commitment to open access and open source development.
- Savvy to medical, legal, and sociological influences in this project. Exceptional communication skills.
- Keen scientific acumen, intense technical ability, and broad social awareness.
- M.D. or Ph.D. in biological sciences highly desirable.
- Appointment: 1 year, renewal contingent on performance and funding.
Range: $48,372-$55,464."
Perhaps if your parents paid your tuition or subsidized your expenses this would be tenable position. Otherwise, despite college presidents who implore graduates to follow their bliss -- no doubt irritating endowment fund managers -- why not consulting or banking? Don't even start about "wishlists" of hiring criteria. It's basically a postdoc job at UC Berkeley for that person who's an MD, a research scientist, an accomplished software architect, and an "intense" techie, but paradoxically, who is also socially aware, astute about legal and sociological issues, and an excellent communicator. Someone with all those incredible accomplishments will no doubt sign on to work as a developer/lab-rat for half the money that either an MD, an accomplished developer, communicator, or a technical architect anywhere in the Bay Area could earn.
If you are this person, the MD/developer/communicator god, the top end salary for this position is $55,000. Minus $10,000 for federal tax and $3,000 for state taxes, gives you $42,000 to live on in one of the most expensive areas of the country. Sales tax is about 8-9%, health insurance will set you back more than you think, and the balance you can use to cover your dependents, car, gas, food, and housing, movies, books, etc. Then, once you move here you should be prepared to be up and packing at the end of a year.
Should you be so lucky to get a grant renewal, a recent search of Berkeley houses on MDLS gives you a better idea of how far that $2900 a month take-home will go. A very modest 1,170 square foot house in a very "modest" area of Berkeley is priced at $589,000; a 1,451 square foot house is priced at $769,000, and a 1,583 square foot house is $899,000. You get the drift -- bungalows on tiny lots in a temperate climate. The $589,000 house, which may need some work from the looks of it, can be had at a fixed rate 6.25% 30 year loan that will require a monthly payment of over $3600 per month. So you'll be renting.
Obama voices an understanding of the difficulty of these difficulties when he says: "I've proposed a $4,000 tuition credit, every student, every year..."
Plumbers Get Lots of Appreciation....
McCain answered Schieffer's question on math and science education like this:
"Well, it's the civil rights issue of the 21st century...There's no doubt that we have achieved equal access to schools in America after a long and difficult and terrible struggle. We need to encourage programs such as...Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification...
As far as college education is concerned, we need to make those student loans available."
McCain continued his concise, to the point answer:
"I'm sure you're aware, Senator Obama, of the program in the Washington, D.C., school system where vouchers are provided...That was vouchers. That was voucher, Senator Obama. And I'm frankly surprised you didn't pay more attention to that example...3
And more: "town hall meeting after town hall meeting, parents come with kids, children -- precious children who have autism. Sarah Palin knows about that better than most. And we'll find and we'll spend the money, research, to find the cause of autism."3
Plumbers make $250,000 a year? We should all be plumbers.
----------------------------------
1 And about that plumber and the "spread the wealth around" remark. It wasn't Obama's best moment -- although, really, how much campaigning can one do and still keep standing? If it was a conspiracy, they were brilliant about making Obama say those words. Leave it to Joe the plumber and Fox News cherry-pick the whole 5 minute Obama response for that one phrase.
I do admire the self reliance of those who don't want to pay taxes, who blithely scoff at the need of policemen, fire stations and social security -- who complain mightily about taxes and government, but are first to yell when public spending cuts effect them. But how many miles does Joe drive everyday on the job, house to house to house via Ohio's deteriorating roads? Has he ever tested his truck axles out on a road that's really in disrepair? What about Ohio's building booms, supplemented with state funded roads, water and sewer -- new developments and houses that in turn assure plumbers business?
2 Obama has paid attention to vouchers I'm sure. The book "Nudge", which includes a chapter on vouchers, was written by Cass Sunstein, an advocate of "paternal libertarianism" who is an advisor to Obama. The book illustrates the gist of "paternal libertarianism" by explaining that cafeterias can position carrots in a more conspicuous place than pizza to encourage healthy eating. It uses this innocuous example to "nudge" you to its conclusions that this paternalism would be a good for bringing government public policy to fruition -- healthcare, education, and retirement benefits. The Freakonomics blog explains it like this "it is a lot easier to trick them into doing what you want than to try to educate them or incentivize them to change their behavior. There are many ways to trick people, but one of the easiest is simply by giving thought to the way choices are arrayed to them, or what they call "choice architecture." Like it? The Nudge authors would like the government to entice people to accept vouchers, heathcare plans, and other government crafted choices.
Some interesting recent research by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank and Princeton concluded that achievement levels of students using vouchers were "not significantly different than zero", and that "very little evidence about the potential for public schools to respond to increased competitive pressure generated by vouchers also suggests that one should remain wary that large-scale improvements would result from a comprehensive system." The work, "School vouchers: Recent findings and unanswered questions", was published in 3Q/2008, Economic Perspectives.
3 Autism research won't benefit from Sarah Palin's vow to tell the government to "get out of the way." Nor will it benefit from McCain's proposal in the first debate for a "spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs."
