Unique Insights from Interview Data

Many unique insights emerged from the follow-up interviews that were not express objects of focus in this dissertation study. They are included to provide additional insight to this research

103

and open avenues for future research. Furthermore, these nuanced perspectives demonstrate the complexity of this issue. STEM and liberal arts education policy has been framed as a zero-sum game. However, even among policy actors who favored that viewpoint, points of divergence emerged among either/or proponents.

The district superintendent that was interviewed in this study adopted rhetoric indicating support for the zero-sum position placing STEM in competition with the liberal arts. He also diverged with zero-sum actors on issues such as school choice, charter schools, and teacher performance pay. He states, “You know, the Medical Board has all doctors on it. The Law Board, I mean, the Bar, has all lawyers on it. The CPA has all CPA accountants, but the Board of Education has no educators. Not even one. And they’re totally controlled by Jeb Bush. And the quicker Jeb drops out [of the 2016 Presidential race] the better off we will be” (P1, p. 5).

He spent much of his interview commenting on the difficulty on recruiting qualified math and science teachers. A primary focus was certification. He felt that the state should be more flexible in allowing pathways into the classroom for qualified professionals in STEM fields, and that the district should have the means of compensating them properly. He states,

Our local community program has a teacher prep program and, gosh I can’t say it, education we’re worse than the military on having acronyms, but it’s a teacher education program for people who do not have a degree from the school of education, which I think is ridiculous. They have to go through that program all year to get certification. Case in point, I hired a lady…she graduated with a degree in aerospace engineering. She worked for NASA at the Cape and Houston, working on the shuttle and the space station. And mathematically, she was certified 6-12 through the state of Florida in math…but they would not certify her in physics…This lady, she was our teacher of the year, and God, she should have been the state teacher of the year…she doesn’t need to waste her time, doing, you know, ‘here’s how you should be doing’…and certainly didn’t need to go take that test, and pay $200, to be certified in physics! (P1, pp. 3-4, emphasis respondent’s)

He was also especially critical of the pet projects of legislators that he saw as wastes of time and money. This was particularly true with teacher pay, which one legislator attempted to tie to a teacher’s college entrance exam scores. He notes, “And last year, one of the legislators had a great idea, he…wanted to pay teachers a $10,000 bonus based on their SAT or ACT score

that they took when they were 18...there’s no correlation between an SAT score and an effective teacher in the classroom. No more than a doctor, an MD, and his or her ability to be a great medical doctor…it would waste $40 million dollars” (P1, p. 5). The pathway to strong STEM results was not rewarding teachers for a test they took in high school. It was smoothing out the pathway to certification for STEM professionals and starting them on a higher step in the pay scale based on their experience in scientific fields.

The higher education union leader interviewed for this study might have been one of the strongest voices for the both/and balance between STEM and liberal arts fields. He was a proponent of Capital K research and not relying on the linear model of crafting or controlling university research for the purpose of perceived economic impact. He was concerned that a race to the bottom with faculty salaries and benefits will diminish the quality of HEIs in Florida and threaten their ability to provide economic innovation for the state. He states,

Right, move the nation ahead, globalize the university, bring bucks into the university, grant bucks and royalty bucks, you know Florida State, its big money-maker for years was Taxol. They made a ton of freakin’ money off of Taxol. As in hundreds of millions, cause it’s a widely used cancer drug….Sir Harry Kroto, Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry and he was part of the faculty for some time, semi-retired and moving back to England…how do you keep those kind of guys on the faculty if it’s a race to the bottom? (P2, p. 10)

He also saw corporatization of the university as a threat to both academic freedom as well as university autonomy, noting “Trying to get universities to get corporate, private funding…it’s having a negative influence on higher education…Koch Brothers just being one available, yet all sorts of corporate donors and private individuals making donations, you know and they do it all they time, but there’s always been a clear line between the donor’s wishes and the desire of the university and particularly the faculty to keep themselves at arm’s length from any donor, so that the research isn’t tainted” (P2, p. 3). The union leader lamented that higher education has lost its status as a non-politicized neutral zone, and that performance metrics created by the legislature have forced universities to compete for previously allotted funds. Such actions create zero-sum

105

games at the state level, forcing universities to compete against each other. He saw that as antithetical to the purpose of higher education: the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake. He states,

P2:I’ve always believed that the purpose of a university education is to produce and enlighten an educated citizenry. Period. It ain’t to produce an economic engine, and it ain’t to satisfy the politics of one party or another. It’s to create knowledge for knowledge’s sake. You know, and hopefully that knowledge gets used in a way that benefits all of society…

RL: So would you say that some of this research that’s pursued…could some of that potentially have economic benefit? That it wasn’t originally designed for?

P2: Yeah, sure…you produce knowledge for knowledge’s sake, and some creative mind can take something that some researcher did at the University of California and combine it with something that somebody did at the University of Florida and put the two together and come up with a product or service or something that improves our lives (pause)…hell, yeah. That’s what it’s there for. (P2, p. 8).

This perspective falls in line with the university administrator interviewed for this study. He was concerned with the need for civic engagement and called for new performance metrics which took into account elements like service and participation in the community. Like the union leader, the university administrator was also concerned with corporatization on campus, but he was more worried about its potential to erode the academy’s mission of service and creating well-rounded graduates. He saw the liberal arts as a means of completing STEM study, and noted that STEM-only concentration can potentially lead to dangerous results. He states, “I believe that it doesn’t matter how educated you are in the sciences and in math, if you do not have an understanding of human nature and human history, you can do (pause)…not necessarily good things with your science and math background. I mean, no one wants a technocrat with no understanding of human beings (P3, p. 1).

He provided an extreme example of some of those “not necessarily good things” that STEM-centric graduates could do with their unbalanced education. He notes,

Let’s step back on this thing and put it into an American context. Um, think about, for example, groups like Al Qaeda and even Daesh…ISIS. A lot of their members seem to be engineers. That’s a fascinating thing to me. What that suggests to me is that perhaps a heavy emphasis on the STEM disciplines does not provide you with an opportunity to work with other people and think about other people and their perspectives and their beliefs. It tends to make you believe that you have the one right answer…I think

honestly in the hard sciences…in these STEM disciplines, I think there’s less of a, um, questioning yourself…I mean certainly you’re questioning hypotheses, scientific hypotheses, but you might not be questioning the rightness of your beliefs. (P3, pp. 4-5, emphasis respondent’s).

Each of these items was not a primary focus of this study, but emerged organically in the course of these semi-structured interviews. Generally speaking, non-lawmakers identified the state legislature as the primary mover of education policy, and they did not consider it a strong ally of education. Funding models, certification pathways, and performance metrics were major concerns to the participants involved, even more so than perceptions policy actors had of STEM and the liberal arts. Even though they were not central features of this study, they could be strong avenues for future research.

4.2.6 Summary

None of the subgroups were homogenous in nature. The either/or, zero-sum position received more overt support from several policy actors, most notably superintendents and lawmakers. However, the both/and balanced viewpoint, which stressed STEM support as well as value for liberal arts fields, also showed strong support across demographic groups.

Zero-sum proponents were more likely than both/and advocates to express alarm toward economic rivals like India and China. However, policy actors of all viewpoints expressed varying opinions on how to approach those competitors, with jobs and salaries as a primary concern.

The participants who completed follow-up interviews had many valid concerns that were not primary focuses of this study. K-12 certification pathways, salary scales, union negotiations, performance matrices, and the relationship between government and academy stakeholders were all more pressing issues than the perceptions policy actors had of STEM and liberal arts

107

education. These perspectives bolstered this study by adding unexpected viewpoints, and mapped out new research possibilities.

Finally, the state legislature was seen as the primary driver of education policy in Florida, and it was not viewed as a friendly ally of the academy. While the legislature provided funding for higher education, that funding often included conditions which threatened academic autonomy and freedom. Union representatives and university administrators were also concerned with the consequences of the corporatization of higher education. That raises an interesting dilemma. The state government as well as private companies and individuals all offer funding opportunities for colleges and universities, and each of those opportunities contain downsides. Unless higher education institutions can emerge as financially self-sufficient entities, they might have to decide which conditions they are comfortable with accepting.