REASON 2:  I have a "particularly favorable" family.  

Everyone who knows me knows that I married to the most supportive, wonderful person.  Over our 24 years together, Curtis has always been the first to say "do it" when I mention a new challenge or opportunity.  He doesn't balk at my chances or immediately think of the hassle to him personally.  The Einstein Fellowship was no different; he supported me and our little family throughout this crazy time; moving across the country, learning a new town and moments of feeling isolated or lonely.   It's been a super busy work year for Curtis, but even when he's not home we take time each night to talk about the best parts of our days.  Thank you, Curtis.

Maybe there is something genetic, but our son Carrick has been equally as supportive.  Even though he's "only" 13, Carrick has (at moments) been wise beyond his years.  I know I was asking a lot of a kid to leave the comfort of school, friends, team and routine to move across the country and be plopped into a new habitat.  There have certainly been moments of frustration for him, but overall he's displayed a real sense of adventure and openness to new experiences.  There is no doubt in my mind that one of the best parts of this year has been the chance for Carrick and I to spend so much time together without the distraction (for lack of a better word) of school commitments and/or social lives.  The time has been a gift and I've loved spending it with our kid.  Thank you, Carrick.

As Curtis and I raise an only child, I can't help but think of my parents and what it was like for them to parent me, also an only child.  I am so very appreciative for all of the "gifts" (not tangible) my parents have given me throughout my life.  Their support of me throughout the fellowship has been no exception.  From editing my application essays to filling their garage with our moving boxes, my parents are both emotionally and practically supportive of this adventure.  Thank you, Mom and Dad. 

REASON 3:  I am part of a "particularly favorable" fellowship cohort.  

​One commute morning this past spring, I was listening to a TED Radio Hour podcast and the host, Guy Raz, was interviewing John Koenig, author of a dictionary of made up words, called "The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows."  His dictionary aims to fill the gaps in the English language with terms to describe emotions.  I was caught off guard when Guy asked John to define the word "Monachopsis" because this "fake" word perfectly defined moments of my Fellowship.

Being in a relatively isolate fellowship position, without the hustle, bustle and vibrancy of a classroom, without the chitter-chatter of the science department lunch table, without the pressure of planning daily lessons and balancing too much grading with not enough time - I was feeling out of place, out of my "intended habitat".  There were moments of this fellowship in which I felt "out of place", but as the definition of monachopsis states, I was able to "huddle in the company of other misfits"... my fellow fellows.

We are a group of twelve math and science teachers, brought together to experience a year out of our norm, collectively working toward improving STEM education for the kids in our classes and in our nation.  We were able to learn together, laugh together, challenge each other and grow together, professionally and personally.  It's been a pleasure to get to know each of them and I look forward to the social media tracking and "real life" reunions we are sure to have in the future.  Thank you, Kim. Thank you, Ruth Ann.  Thank you, John.  Thank you, Lisa.  Thank you, Chris.  Thank you, Jennifer.  Thank you, Becky.  Thank you, Kelly.  Thank you, Michael. Thank you, Evan.  And especially, thank you, David.

REASON 4:  I have "particularly favorable" school colleagues

As I return to teaching, I am so glad that I will be returning back to a system, school and department that have been so supportive of me leaving for a year.  During the application process I met with our assistant superintendent of human resources and school principal to make sure that I would be welcome back after a one year leave of absence.  I wasn't willing to leave a school and job I love if I wasn't going to be able to return.  Thank you, Lisa and for supporting teacher professional development and encouraging me from afar.

There is also no doubt I would have felt comfortable leaving my classroom if I didn't trust my science department teacher colleagues to carry the IB Biology load while I was away.  I've poured my heart and soul into the IB Biology class I teach (this website is a testament of that) and my colleagues have more than risen to the occasion of teaching the class in my absence.  Thank you, Chris.  Thank you, Allie.  And most importantly, thank you, Steve.  I'm looking forward to being back and co-teaching with you again. 

I kind of feel like the Einstein Fellowship can be perfectly summarized by this Calvin and Hobbes comic:  ​

"Is our quick experience here pointless?
Does anything we say or do in here really matter?
Have we done anything important?
Have we been happy?
Have we made the most of these precious fes [months]??"

My answers:
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

And with that, 2017-2018 Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellowship ... over and out.

With gratitude,
​GvB

Throughout the year, I’ve been keeping a running list of “things to blog about.”  The list is too long and time time too short for me to write extensive posts for everything on my list. With just a week left as an Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellow, I am going to use this entry to write about experiences about which I have not yet written so that I have a record of all I have had the opportunity to do and see. This post is mostly me word vomiting a brief description (some heavily pulled from formal agendas) of all I’ve done so that I’m less likely to forget as I return to the reality of teaching back home!

In January, we explored topics faced by teacher leaders and practiced using the logic model developed by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).  We problem solved common issues found in school systems and used a ‘critical friends’ type protocol to refine the goals, activities, and measurements for impact to address the dilemma.  As a critical friend coach in my home district, I especially enjoyed the deep thinking and collaborative problem solving in which we engaged.

Some of the work we completed using the ASCD protocol for Teach-to-Lead

Between January and March a small group of Einstein fellows worked in a collaborative group to complete a Stanford course on using and developing performance assessments related to the Next Generation Science Standards framework.  The course involved learning about the three-dimensions of the NGSS and how to use performance assessments in the classroom. We developed a student focused, embedded performance assessment that had students using authentic epidemiological data about cancer rates around the United States to make and support claims about the effects of smoking on cancer development.  

Between January and March I was also participating in a series of three online evolution course offered through the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.  The courses, which required about 10 hours to complete, focused on the mechanisms of evolution, sources of evidence supporting evolutionary theory and patterns of evolution, including phylogenies and macroevolution.  Not to sound arrogant, but honestly I can’t say I learned anything I didn’t already know. However I did make notes about how the information was being presented (scope, sequence) which will certainly inform my future evolution unit plans.  

Carrick and I had a great February night at the National Museum of American History learning from Kareem Abdul-Jabbar about how invention, innovation and STEM education can be a powerful tool to fight social and racial inequalities and injustice.  This was actually our second time seeing him; he was in Seattle a few years ago and we heard him talk about sticking out (literally) while he was in middle school and how his middle school experience really framed his perspective in life. He is humble, confident, smart and inspirational.

The cyclical nature of the Einstein Fellowship was evident when in March our current cohort of Fellows participated in the interview weekend for the 2018-2019 batch of teachers.  I was reminded of the excitement and uncertainty of being a candidate and the true honor it is to have been selected as a Fellow. The applicants were incredible, accomplished educators and it was wonderful to be able to spend two days chatting about teaching and comparing teaching scenarios.  I assisted with two days of interviews and can attest that the quality of educator who applies for this Fellowship is stellar. I’ve already made contacts with a few in the incoming cohort and I hope their experience is as rewarding as mine has been.    

Also in March, fellow Fellows Kelly and Jennifer lead our group through a discussion and reflection on internalizing the growth (vs. fixed) mindset as educational leaders.  We examined research, participated in activities steeped in educational psychology and examined high profile cases of the “Power of Yet” to deepen our knowledge of a familiar and longstanding concept in education.

In April the Fellows had the opportunity to collaborate with the teams at the National Governors Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures. We discussed educational equity and equitable access for all students, how to communicate with local and state policy decision makers and how to effectively communicate to drive change in education.  A theme was the shared governance of education, from local districts to federal programs and how the various levels of government work together and drive education reform.

In May we visited the National Inventors Hall of Fame Museum and learned about intellectual property and trademarks at the United States Patent and Trade Office.  We modeled the creation of an invention and learned the differences between patent, trademark and copyright. I especially liked learning about plant patents and the guidelines that must be followed for being credited with “inventing” a new plant.  For example, the plant can not naturally occur in nature, must be asexually formed (ie through grafting) and can not be a tuber (no potato patents)! I am a big fan of the Hass avocado ,which originated from a single grafted tree produced by Rudolph Hass in 1926!!  The tree was patented in 1935 (the first patent on a tree in the US). Today the Hass avocado accounts for 80% of avocados grown worldwide and is a billion dollar industry. However, Mr. Hass only made about $5,000 for his invention because cuttings from single trees have been propagated to form whole new orchards.  Makes for a great story for when I am eating guacamole with all of my biology loving friends.

I’ve been trying to get out and about to take advantage of opportunities happening in DC.  In May, my husband and I spent an afternoon at the National Portrait Gallery. I challenged myself to find all the portraits of scientists within the museum. According to their website, there are 31 scientists who have portraits on display in the museum.  I couldn’t find them all, but I certainly enjoyed an afternoon taking on the challenge!

I was also about to go to a book signing and talk by two of my favorite science writers.  Ed Yong is a science journalist who reports for The Atlantic and Carl Zimmer is an award-winner New York Times columnist and the author of 13 books about science.  I couldn’t miss the chance to see him them in June when Carl was in town to promote his newest book, “She Has Her Mother's Laugh.” The room was packed, but I was able to see and hear Ed and Carl banter about genetics, science and science communication in the Trump era.  It was an opportunity I wouldn’t have had if I wasn’t living in DC for the year.

Another highlight was the Safe Zone training provided by Fellow David in July.  Safe Zone trainings are opportunities to learn about LGBTQ+ identities, gender and sexuality and to examine prejudice, assumptions, and privilege associated with different identities.  I always appreciate open and honest conversations and the Safe Zone training was a good reminder that our impact as educators is reliant on us understanding our own identities (sense of who we are, where we come from, and what we believe) and having empathy for our students and their unique identities.  Empathy is foundational for building bridges between individuals, understanding each others' complex emotions, gaining a diverse perspective, and leveraging relationships for learning and progress.

Throughout the Fellowship we’ve been hosting monthly “Twitter Chats.”  A Twitter chat is a public Twitter conversation around one unique hashtag; we’ve been using #EinsteinFellows17. This hashtag allows anyone to follow or participate in the discussion.  We’ve virtually chatted about the AEF program and application, the STEM educator pipeline, professional development opportunities for STEM teachers, STEM education and the media, the teacher leadership career ladder, STEM learning in informal settings, the achievement gap in STEM education, measuring teacher quality, makerspaces and social/emotional learning in the STEM classroom.  

The Einstein Fellows met for the last time as a group last week  at our “end of year roundtable” (which was not actually at a round table, which I found disappointing :-)).  Our group reflected on our year and our development as leaders and educators. It was incredible to hear the many stories, experiences and opportunities that the the Einstein Fellowship has provided.  The Einstein Fellowship is the like the pebble that triggers a ripple effect. It’s an an opportunity that causes change in teachers that will ripple across the “water” of the STEM education ocean. ​

Throughout the fellowship I have seen how many different careers rely on knowledge of engineering principles.  For example, in February the Fellows went "behind the scenes" at the Smithsonian Museum of American History.  We were able to see the exhibit design workshop, the photography studio and the paper preservation lab.  Each stop on our tour provided an example of how people are applying STEM knowledge to creative careers and how the engineering design-test model is relevant to so many different applications.  

Since that initial experience, I have taken students on an additional ten expeditions. While no long directly associated with Nat Geo, the Earthwatch expeditions my students and I participate in definitely mesh with the National Geographic Society’s missions of exploring and protecting our plant while inspiring new generations through education initiatives and resources.  Given impact and mission of the National Geographic Society, when the Einstein Fellows visited I was excited to learn of the educator certification program.   “The Educator Certification program equips educators with the resources and training needed to teach students about the world in innovative, interdisciplinary ways. Benefits of certification include professional recognition; connection to a community of like-minded educators; and access to resources, mentorship, and leadership opportunities with National Geographic. Through this program, educators will learn about the National Geographic mission, how to teach interdisciplinarily through various scales and perspectives, and the National Geographic Learning Framework—all while applying these ideas to their own work and collaborating with educators worldwide.”  ​

My fellowship year is winding down and I am finally making time to write about some of the things I’ve done earlier in the year that have been on my “to blog” list but I haven’t gotten around to yet.  Mostly I just want to document my experiences because I know that in hindsight this year as an Einstein fellow will feel like a blur. The recent 4th of July firework spectacular reminded me of another display of holiday lights, Christmas!

Way back in December I joined with the two NASA fellows to attend a lecture by Dr. Miguel Roman, a research physical scientist and remote sensing specialist in the Terrestrial Information Systems Laboratory at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.  Dr. Roman’s session was about how NASA scientists are able to use satellite data to remotely sensor the Earth. Satellites provide a unique vantage point of space from planet Earth and enable us to track changes in and interrelatedness between the land, ocean, atmosphere and ice of our planet.​

Dr. Roman is a Earth scientist who is on the team that created the famous “Black Marble” images of our planet at night.  From 500 miles out in space, the NOAA/NASA Suomi National Polar Orbiting Partnership satellite uses a visible infrared imaging radiometer to observe the planet. Human societies run on energy and each night as we switch on the lights to help us function in the dark, patterns of light spread across the surface of Earth creating a spectacular visualization of our energy-use decisions. In fact, during major holidays, such as Christmas in the United States and the holy month of Ramadan in the Middle East, these lighting patterns change and can be seen from space!. ​

Dr. Roman's session was really "lit" and I learned a lot that will "light up" my future instruction of Earth systems and human impact!  🔥 🔥 🔥 ​

Last December, the Albert Einstein Fellows had the opportunity to learn about primary source materials,rare book conservation and preservation science at the Library of Congress (LOC).  We spent a full day learning about the history of the Library, touring the incredible Jefferson building and exploring behind the scenes of the library. The Library was established in 1800 by Congress, however just 14 years later the capital was burned and the library collection was lost.  Thomas Jefferson offered his personal library collection as a replacement. Since 1870 and the advent of the copyright laws, the library has received at least two copies of all copyrighted materials from the United States and around the globe. About fifteen-thousands of new items (books, maps, music, photos, prints, sounds, movies, manuscripts) are added to the collection each day, and there are now over 150 million items!  The Library of Congress is the largest, safest library in the world.

I was mesmerized and knew immediately that I wanted to spend a week at the Library of Congress Summer Teacher Institute learning why and how to incorporate primary sources into classroom instruction. I attended the Institute this past week and my already high expectations were surpassed!  Spending a week learning about the use of primary sources with teachers of all grades from around our nation was invigorating, academically stimulating and quite fun!  

We were able to participate in lessons as if we were students and then had time to reflect and discuss how we would use and/or adapt the instructional activities in our classrooms.  I loved that teachers of students of all grades were able to collaborate and share ideas for modifying lessons. I was the only science teacher of the bunch, which actually was a benefit as I was able to expand my understanding of pedagogical methods traditionally only used in humanities courses.    

Throughout the week, emphasis was placed on primary source analysis skills. Learning how to teach students how to examine primary sources (for example photographs, diary entries and newspapers) using a “see, think, wonder” approach.  We learned and practiced strategies for considering different perspectives and modeled how historians examine sources. There was emphasis on how primary sources can be used to have students construct their own knowledge, deepen understanding of textbook material and support learning of reading and writing skills.

The Library of Congress has a rich collection of digital resources available for public access.  Not only did we learn strategies for searching primary sources on loc.gov, but we had the opportunity to attend an “open house” during which time subject matter experts from the various library divisions were accessible for sharing their resources and collections highlights with the teachers.

Teachers in the Institute were asked to develop a primary source activity plan; a lesson that we will use with students that incorporates the use of primary sources and analysis tools we learned about during the week. There was time each day dedicated towards finding primary resources relevant towards our student and content speciacialties, culminating in a “Gallery Walk and Talk” during which time we shared our lesson ideas.  I focused on using primary sources related to our understanding of the relationship between smoking and cancer.  In the lesson, students examine a variety of primary and secondary sources related to the science, marketing and public policy of cigarette smoking.  Students will use the LOC Primary Source Analysis tool to examine an artifact and then classify the artifacts as either “pro,” “con,” or “neutral” of smoking.  Then, students will place the artifact on a graph depicting the per capita number of cigarettes smoked per year. Observation, trends and the role of science in public policy will be discussed.

The Institute ended with a discussion about the opportunities and strategies for sharing Library of Congress resources with colleagues.  I hope I have the opportunity to share these resources with other teachers in my school, district and state once I am back in the "other Washington" this fall!

Last week was “Capitol Hill Ocean Week” (CHOW)and the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation hosted a series of events to raise awareness around ocean systems, pollution and protection.  I was able to attend three events that I found both educational and inspirational.

The first event was a pop-up exhibit on the National Mall called the Ocean Plastics Lab.  The exhibit was sponsored by NOAA to showcase the global problem of ocean plastic pollution.  Four shipping containers were modified for the exhibit so that the public could learn about the problem of plastic in our ocean.  There was a lot of sample waste from ocean plastic and marine debris, interactive displays about the effects of plastic on marine life.  

Fellow fellow Kelly was volunteering at the LUCid display, an interactive experience that is traveling with the Ocean Plastics Lab. Wearing a biosensor headband, volunteers control the video display.  Apparently, in a more meditative state of mind the imagery shifts from swimming through plastic in ocean waters to seeing whales in clear water. I was pretty good at getting into a zen state!

The other two events I attended for CHOW were scientific talks about the status of ocean ecosystems.  I went to sessions that related both to my personal interests and content that is part of the IB Biology curriculum I teach.  The first session was titled, “Recovering Coral Reefs.” I’ve had an interest in coral health ever since I traveled to the Bahamas in 2009 to assist with a coral reef survey. Covering less than 1 percent of the ocean, coral reefs support 25 percent of marine life globally to provide an estimated $1 trillion in value to the world economy, including $300 to $400 million annual in value for food and livelihoods from tourism, fisheries, and medicine. Reefs are integral to the livelihoods and well-being of billions of people. But, we risk losing these valuable ecosystems. Nearly 75 percent of the world’s coral reefs are threatened by overfishing, habitat destruction, water pollution, climate change, and ocean acidification. Efforts to conserve and restore coral reefs are lagging far behind their rate of destruction. To preserve this amazing biodiversity, we must protect these valuable ecosystems and develop new conservation solutions and restoration techniques to protect these invaluable ecosystems.

There was a discussion by a panel of three scientists who monitor coral reefs.  Greg Asner from the Carnegie Institution for Science studies global ecology and earth systems using remote sensing via satellite or airplane.  He observes and maps coral reef fragmentation in effort to determine where restoration efforts should be focused.  Erinn Muller is a coral health and disease scientist with the Mote Marine Laboratory in Florida. Documenting coral decline was understandably depressing for her, so she now focuses on recovery of reefs, by “outplanting” genetically variable and disease resistant coral starters.  Early results suggest the outplanting effort is working, and her goal is for another 50,000 outplants next year however the program’s success will depend on the government response and dedication of funds for research and restoration of reefs.  Luiz Rocha is an ichthyologist with the California Academy of Sciences.  He studies mesophilic coral reef ecosystems; these are deeper reefs (200-500 ft).  With each dive he discovers new species because these deep reefs are unknown and unexplored.  However, the reefs are still at human induced risk. Recently he found plastic on the reef, brought to the depths when a hurricane passed through the region.  

The three scientists all communicated a vision of hope and a desire to scale up the restoration projects occurring at a local level to a more global scale. The effort will required international collaboration between nations, increased funding, public-private partnerships and a continued reliance on solid science.  Members of the public who support these efforts should amplify the message via social media, influence others, decrease use of plastic, and encourage governments to address climate change. #oceanoptimism

In this session, I learned how states are coping with local effects of ocean acidification as state and federal policymakers draft legislation to mitigate and adapt to ocean acidification.  My home state of Washington has been particularly affected by acidification, and I was able to make some personal connections to the impacts of acidification. In fact, the University of Washington  now hosts the Washington Ocean Acidification Center within the College of the Environment.

The panel include experts from a diverse set of perspectives.  Jan Newton is an oceanographer in the Applied Physics Laboratory at the University of Washington School of Oceanography and School of Marine and Environmental Affairs.  Karina Nielsen is a biologist and the director of the Estuary and Ocean Science Center at San Francisco State University. Nichole Price is a research scientist and director of the Center for Venture Research on Seafood Security at the Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences.  Joseph Salisbury is a research professor of Oceanography at the University of New Hampshire and Brett Veerhusen is the head of Ocean Strategies and is an Alaskan commercial fisherman.

As with all my experiences as an Einstein Fellow, I am so thankful for my opportunity to be here, learning and engaging with issues of concern that resonate with me.  I will take my learning back to the classroom for my students benefit.

Dr. Brown is a USDA research entomologist, so his research primarily focuses on insects that are of economic importance to American agriculture.  Dr. Brown did a great job explaining why an understanding of insect taxonomy, natural selection and basic biology are important in protecting and understanding national and ecological interests. ​

After our tour, I lead a session with the Fellows about using creativity and visual arts as a way to increase student engagement and to teach observation skills.  We had fun creating visual displays of the favorite insects we had seen on the tour. 

Within the WDTS team, a focus of my duties has been assisting with the National Science Bowl. I didn’t know much about the National Science Bowl when I accepted the fellowship and as such it was a quick and steep learning curve for me.  The program is run by an incredibly dedicated and organized federal employee who has help from a loyal team of regional coordinators, alumni and volunteers. My role as a fellow was to help as needed and not get in the way!
In the fall, I was tasked with looking for ideas to enhance the National and Regional Science Bowl programs and websites by researching other academic competitions. I explored the websites of twenty academic competitions and compiled a report on the features of the other academic competitions that I found to be especially engaging, helpful or interesting.  They were not true suggestions or recommendations, as I am not privy to all of the restrictions placed upon a federally funded program or limitations on website development and hosting. However, perhaps the features I suggested can serve as inspiration in future website development or program design changes.
​
I also reviewed questions for the regional competitions and the national finals.  A team of subject-matter-expert question writers submits questions, which are then reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and reviewed again to ensure content accuracy and format conventions. I focused on the middle school life and physical science questions and the high school biology and chemistry questions. It was tedious but also an incredible learning opportunity. I often found myself exploring academic tangents, getting deeper and deeper into a web of facts, structures, functions, reactions and equations. It was awesome!  At no other time in my life have I had the opportunity to just sit and learn more about the classification of aseptate fungi or the standard-state free energy of formation calculations!

​I had other tasks for Science Bowl, including the development of a Snap Chat filter, updating the National Science Bowl Facebook page with review questions and relevant news articles, proofreading team biographies and assisting with the packing and organizing of materials. I also updated some of the Powerpoint presentations and assisted with volunteer recruitment for the national finals.  Shout out to my fellow fellows (!) David, Michael, Evan and Jennifer for making time in your schedules to volunteer!

I was responsible for planning and leading sessions for the middle school students on Saturday afternoon.  After being eliminated from the competition, the student teams participated in a "Middle School Enhancement Activity."  Knowing that the kids would be physically and intellectually exhausted, I created an engineering challenge for the student in which they had to design a "Wacky Monster Transporter."  It was chaotic and fun for the students and I! 

On Sunday I was responsible for planning and leading sessions for the middle school coaches while the students were participating in a Cyber Challenge.  It was great to be working with "my people" (other teachers) and to again be facilitating a professional development session.  The coaches were receptive to engaging in an engineering design challenge - designing a catapult to fling a marshmallow.  As is typical with design challenges, the teachers had grand plans for how far the marshmallows would move, and the reactions when we measured distances in centimeters rather than meters led to a great laugh.  Here's a link to a Padelet with team photos and marshmallow flinging distances.

Middle School Coaches at building marshmallow launching catapults!

The final round competitions were the culmination of a lot of hard work by a lot of people.  The pomp and circumstance of the event is justified, as the student competitors certainly do represent some of the brightest, quickest intellects in our nation. It was a pleasure to have played my little part in the Science Bowl this year and I hope to remain part of the science bowl family for years to come.

​Our discussion focused on the “High Frequency Aspirations for STEM Education Aligned to Administration Goals.”  This was a DRAFT list of the ten STEM education priorities that are bubbling to the surface as being goals of the Trump administration STEM Ed 5-year plan. I'm just going to say it here: these priorities do not fully align with what I view as most important in STEM education.  That doesn't mean they aren't good, worthwhile goals - it's just not what I would prioritize if I was the boss.  But, I digress... (priorities tend to shift based on political affiliation).

Given that the Aspirations for STEM education needed to be aligned with administration goals, I was curious as to exactly what those goals actually are.  From what is presented on the the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy website, the Trump administration prioritizes "American Military Superiority”, “American Security,” “American Prosperity,” “American Energy Dominance,” and “American Health."  There is also a theme of increased reliance on the private sector to fund research, development and commercialization of technologies in the prioritized fields.  These priorities are intended to receive special focus in agency budget requests and as WH initiatives.  

The Trump administration states that it will continue the federal government's commitment to STEM education and apprenticeship programs. In fact, the R&D priorities memo (August 2017) states, “Emerging technologies will present tremendous opportunities for new job creation, but will also require a technically skilled and capable workforce to meet demand. In order to maintain American competitiveness and help ensure that the domestic workforce is available and qualified for the jobs of the future, agencies should incorporate STEM education, including computer science education, and workforce training opportunities into their programs. Agencies should give priority to policies and actions that place an emphasis on expanding the STEM workforce to include all Americans, for both urban and rural, and including women and other underrepresented groups in STEM fields. In order to track improvements in these areas, agencies should develop quantitative methods or metrics and collect data to analyze the effectiveness of the STEM programs.” 

Of interesting note is the focus on learning STEM for workforce development purposes only.  The "High Frequency Aspirations" document made no mention of learning for curiosity, knowledge of societal issues or for the importance of an informed electorate.  Again, perhaps a party line division here, but I strongly believe that public education does not have the sole function of workforce development. Yes, workforce development is important and is a consequence of high quality STEM education, however I personally think the primary focus of education should be sustainment of a democracy with informed, educated citizens.   ​

I definitely learned a lot at our two hour meeting at OSTP and I hope that the cynicism I felt as I left the meeting is proven to be misplaced and undeserved. I am thankful for the Einstein Fellowship and the opportunity to add depth to my understanding of the complexities of federal STEM education initiatives and priorities. 

So few teachers who specialize in a discipline ever have the opportunity for professional development that focuses on the content of the discipline.  For example, I teach biology and I love biology, but until this fellowship year I haven't had the time, money or opportunity to focus on learning more BIOLOGY.  I've been to plenty of conferences and district sessions about how to teach biology, but not had the opportunity to actually focus on advancing my own biological content knowledge.  Now don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that my biological knowledge hasn't advanced since I graduated with my biology degree nearlytwenty years ago; far from it.  I make a concerted effort to remain up to date in the field.  For example, I am a biology news geek, I am sure to take time daily to read the newest articles about advances and discoveries (which I share on Twitter #ibbio and post to my website topic pages). 

For me, probably the best part of being an Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellow is the opportunities I've had to advance my own biological content knowledge and to witness firsthand the scientific process in action.  I've previously written about a couple of these opportunities. 

This week I was able to attend the Synthetic and Artificial Cells workshop, a gathering of about 25 cell biologists from the USA and Europe who are interested in building an artificial cell or models of cellular processes in order to understand the nature of how cells work and to develop applications such as pharmaceutical drug delivery systems.  As the National Science Foundation deputy director for Biological Science said in the introduction to the workshop, "we've spent decades taking cells apart; now we need to determine how to put it all together."

Some big idea questions can be answered by trying to make synthetic cells (or cell processes ex vivo):

• Can life emerge?
• What are the rules of life?
• How did life begin?

Such big problems will require international collaboration and a cross disciplinary approach.

Throughout the conference I took lots of notes.  I was especially intrigued the some of the conversations that mimic those held in my classroom.  Questions such as:

• "What is life?"
  
• "Why does life emerge?"
  
• "What are the pros and cons of a systems vs reductionist approach?" 

There are two main approaches to creating synthetic cells, the "top down" approach and the "bottom up" approach.  Some of the researchers (i.e. Dr. Hutchinson) were focused on one approach while others were focused on the structures and functions of sub-cellular components. 

A highlight of the workshop was hearing from Clyde Hutchison, a well known and respected biologist from the J. Craig Venter  Institute.  Dr. Hutchison discussed his teams progress on creating a minimal bacterial cell which contains only the core machinery for life.  Following a "design --> build --> test" model, the team is systematically removing genes from Mycoplasma bacteria and observing the phenotypic effects on the cells ability to sustain life. They started with a bacteria that contained 901 genes (1079 bp) and by "Syn 3.0" have created a living cell that now has 473 genes (531 bp).  Fascinatingly, the minimal viable cells contains 65 genes that are essential for life but who's function is unknown!  Additionally, the implications of  OMNIGENIC was discussed. The idea of omnigenics is that in reality, no single gene has a single function - there is complexity in the interactions of the genes and gene products. Proof that we still have a lot to learn in biology. ​

Dr. Hutchison was sure to use language to suggest his team had created "A" minimal cell, not "THE" minimal cell.  The genome required of a minimal cell will depend on the medium on which the bacteria is growing.  In other words, a minimal cell genome size for a bacteria grown in one media will be different than the minimal cell genome size for a bacteria grown in another media.  That said, the minimal cell as described by Dr. Hutchison was a big breakthough and will continue to influence the future of the field. 

The J. Craig Venter Institute is using a "Top Down" approach to building a minimal cell.  All of the other presenters at the workshop were focused on a "Bottom Up" approach in which they were focused on creating synthetic or artificial structures and/or processes of cells. 

There were scientists who focused on the INFORMATION aspect of a cell (cell-free transcription and translation) and others focused on the SELF-ORGANIZATION (creating artificial cell membranes). 

One thing I learned was about cellular compartmentalization.  I had learned, and the IB Biology curriculum suggests, that prokaryote cells aren’t compartmentalized.  However, I heard multiple times over the course of this conference about prokaryote compartments (not necessarily membrane bound).  For example, one person said “In prokaryotes, the nucleiod is considered a phase separated compartment.”  I was curious about phase-separation, so I looked it up and found this great summary. 

Throughout the workshop there was a vigorous dialogue between the scientists about the nomenclature around the terms minimum, synthetic and artificial in relation to biology and bio-engineering.  It was clear that I was witnessing the birth of a new scientific discipline.  I summarized a full page of my take aways from the sessions:

What We Say (and How We Say it) Influences Student Learning
Teacher words and tone matter.  ​Have you ever said to a student, "I love the way you're working so hard!"? How about, "Here are the three things I'll be looking for in this next piece of work."? Or perhaps you've said, "If you all work really hard for the next 30 minutes, we'll finish class with something fun!" You probably have—we all have. Even though these statements (among many others) are used with the best of intentions, they might actually lead students to disengage and learn less! In this session, I learned about several common language habits and patterns that many educators find themselves in and had a chance to explore better alternatives.  More information can be found here.

During the September orientation, the Einstein Fellows were indoctrinated to federal education policy through written briefs and presentations (by Washington Partners, LLC) that provided a broad overview of the major pieces of enacted federal education legislation.

• Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, signed in 2015):  governs k-12 education programs and is administered by the Department of Education. 
• Higher Education Act (HEA, last renewed in 2008): governs teacher preparation programs, student financial aid and college-access programs.
• Perkins Career and Technical Education Act (Perkins CTE, last renewed in 2006):  governs career and technical education programs, and is the largest federal program for high schools.
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, last renewed in 2004):  governs special education programs
• Head Start Act (last renewed in 2007):  governs a program that offers early-childhood education services to low-income families.
• American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (AICA, signed in 2017):  authorizes programs at the National Science Foundation and other research agencies to STEM education.
• Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA, last renewed in 2002): governs the Institute of Education Sciences, an independent statistics and evaluation arm of the US Department of Education.
• Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA, last renewed in 2014):  invests in the connection between education and career preparation.
• Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, authorized in 1971):  governs the privacy rights of student educational records. 

Given the renewal dates on these laws and lack of educational policy change looming in the field of view, a major take away for me is that education is not a priority of the federal government.  Education was not a major topic of discussion during the 2016 presidential campaign and it continues to be on the back burner of federal policy concerns.  Depending on your political leanings, this is either a "good or bad" reality.   

The National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) is a non-governmental organization that is able to pair high school graduate information with college registrar information to track student transition post-secondary and through college completion.  They have access to data from 97% of the nation’s post secondary institutions and about 40% of the nation's high school graduates.  Such a large data set enables comparison of college progression rates across state lines and dis-aggregation by high school characteristics (i.e. income, minority, locale).  The NSC creates an annual Benchmark Report which includes data for:

• Immediate (“first fall”) student enrollment in college after high school graduation
• Persistence between the first and second year of college
• College completion within six years post high-school graduation
• Completion in STEM degrees
• Common categories of majors at enrollment versus college completion

A traditional college degree is not the path followed by most high school graduate. High school graduates have many choices for post-secondary education (online courses, certification pathways, community college) and the traditional model of college is changing.  More and more students are utilizing a “just in time education” in which they take the few, select courses they need in order to get their next step level of employment.  Interestingly, the United States has a roughly 35% college transfer rate, illustrating the mobility of our college student population.  

Last week I attended a session at the US Capitol for a discussion of the Benchmark Report during which the following findings were shared:
​
Students who graduate from schools that serve low income or high minority populations are less likely to start college in the first fall after high school graduation.  Graduates from low income schools had the lowest "first fall" college enrollment rates.  

I am happy to have had the opportunity to add three additional organizations to my network.  As an Einstein Fellow, I've had the opportunity to explore Smithsonian Learning Lab, AAAS Science in the Classroom and Discovery Education.  ​