NC/1NR — AT: CC Bad for STEM

2NC/1NR — AT: CC Bad for STEM

No STEM trade off — STEM standards included in Common Core

The good news is we can commit to both the immediacy of the math and English standards required by the basics of Common Core, while ensuring the long-term college- and career-readiness of our students by focusing on STEM. It’s right there in black and white within the standards themselves. Grade level specific targets have been set to make sure that all students reach the College and Career Readiness (CCR) Anchor Standards by the time they graduate from high school. For example, the “CCSS-ELA.Literacy, Informational Text” requires grade specific levels of comprehension of nonfiction by students—and every STEM text out there is nonfiction! Content literacy is an important aspect of the Common Core State Standards. The four CCSS strands—Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language—are applied to content areas in the Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects grades 6-12 section of the document. In grades K-5, the CCSS take an integrated approach to content literacy. One reason STEM nonfiction is an excellent fit for meeting the Common Core English Language Arts requirements is that those requirements are based on comprehension, not merely recitation. Combine the facts learned when reading nonfiction books on STEM topics with experiments and activities fueled by those facts—e.g., students read about condensation, then do a condensation lab—and students are sure to more completely comprehend what they have read, as they have seen it in action. Another reason (and NOT coincidentally) is within the foundation of the Common Core State Standards themselves. After all, the guiding principle of these educational standards is ensuring students are better equipped for the world beyond school, the working world. Simply put, Common Core is entirely about college- and career-readiness. In fact, the College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards are the backbone of the Common Core State Standards. The CCSS translate the broad aims of the CCR into grade-specific standards in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language. It’s no secret that most of the best jobs out there that today’s students can hope to find are in the STEM fields. In fact, economists predict that over 80% of all jobs in the coming decades will require some kind of STEM background. Both the Common Core State Standards, and the Next Generation Science Standards being considered by many states, stress college- and career-readiness. By having students engaged with STEM subjects as part of their Common Core required nonfiction reading today, you can continue to build and maintain their interest in STEM fields tomorrow, and help create the STEM professionals of the future.

Common core standards help STEM fields — especially for women

The Common Core State Standards are an important tool for closing achievement gaps for girls and women—particularly girls and women of color. The Common Core can open the door to high-paying jobs in science, technology, engineering, and math, or STEM, fields, a new fact sheet from the Center for American Progress and American Association of University Women, or AAUW, illustrates. CAP and AAUW’s fact sheet notes that by establishing high-quality, uniform, and rigorous standards, the Common Core helps ensure that all students are taught to the same high expectations. The fact sheet looks at how the Common Core State Standards can impact and benefit girls and women starting from K-12, through higher education, and after college and beyond. It also touches on improving school achievement, reducing the need for remedial courses in college, increasing the number of women in STEM fields, and closing the wage gap after college. Key statistics from the fact sheet include: On the eighth-grade National Assessment of Educational Progress exam, a nationally representative assessment of the knowledge and skills of American students, girls are 20 percent less likely to achieve proficiency in science than boys. Girls are underrepresented among AP test-takers in nearly all STEM fields. In 2013, male students outnumbered female students by more than 2.5-to-1 on the Physics C exam. The pay gap between women and men is established directly after college. In 2009, college-educated women made, on average, 82 percent of men’s salaries one year after graduation. Although there is still a gap, the gap narrows when women pursue STEM majors and careers, which are built on a strong foundation in mathematics. “High expectations and rigorous standards—including those embodied by the Common Core—are essential to raising student achievement. Success in STEM fields is crucial not only for students themselves, but for our national economic outlook,” said Carmel Martin, Executive Vice President for Policy at CAP. “Nothing should stand in the way of girls and women succeeding in STEM classes or careers. The Common Core will help build powerful academic foundation for all students.” “Bias and stereotypes prevent girls from performing well in STEM, pursuing STEM majors, and ultimately working in high-paying STEM fields,” said Lisa Maatz, AAUW Vice President of Government Relations. “Our research has found that one way to mitigate stereotypes’ damaging effects is through explicit and transparent standards, such as the Common Core. The Common Core ensures that all students are being taught the standards they need to succeed.

New Common Core Science Standards Key to STEM Education

Neuhauser 15 — Alan Neuhauser, Alan Neuhauser is an energy, environment and STEM reporter for U.S. News & World Report. ("Common Core: A Spark for STEM," US News & World Report, 6-30-2015, Available Online at http://www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2015/06/30/common-core-a-spark-for-stem, Accessed 7-21-2015)

Ambitious new national science standards, building atop nationwide math and English standards, can play a role in spurring investment and innovation in science, technology, engineering and math education, a panel of experts and advocates said Tuesday at the 2015 U.S. News & World Report STEM Solutions Conference in San Diego. "The standards are the best hope of laying out expectations that the country understands are expectations for everyone," said Delia Pompa, senior vice president of programs for La Raza, a Latino advocacy group. She was joined on the panel by Chris Minnich, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, where he led development of what became the Common Core State Standards that set nationwide benchmarks for math and English education. Next Generation Science Standards were released in April 2013. The standards, though agreed to by 48 governors, have become a "political football," Minnich said, part of the larger ideological fight over the extent – or perceived extent – of federal regulation over state home-rule. Some educators and advocacy groups have also voiced concern that the standards may prove too stringent. [SPECIAL REPORT: A Guide to Common Core] "They may think we're moving too fast or the tests are unfair – all that I get," Minnich said."If we can just get through this hard conversation of what kids should be able to do, in five to seven years we should see some pretty good progress." He added: "What I've been heartened by is the teachers and the administrators across the country that I've interacted with, a majority of them get what we're trying to do." Tougher standards can prove a boon, argued Okha Lee, a professor of childhood education at New York University. "It raises the bar for content because it's academically rigorous," Lee said, advocating curricula that encourages students to "inquire," "ask questions, and "use models and argue from evidence." "Good instruction should have been figuratively speaking noisy because the students are doing the talking and doing the work," Lee said. "We should hear the kids talking and not the adult talking." Standards, however, are not a panacea. "They are a first step," Pompa acknowledged. As Peter A ' Hearn, a K-12 specialist at the Palm Springs Unified School District in California described, "The achievement gap is really – it's pretty significant, and it's a challenge for students looking to go into the STEM careers that we know are the careers of the future." The key to closing those gaps, he and the panelists said, is both a broad approach, and one that starts early. "We have to start talking about STEM when kids are in preschool," Pompa said. "We have to start talking about STEM when kids are in the kitchen with their parents cooking and they can relate STEM to science principles. And we have to have opportunities to expose entire families to STEM careers, science packages."

2NC/1NR — AT: No Impact to Econ Decline

STEM Workers Play a Direct Role in Economic Growth

Rothwell 13-- Jonathan Rothwell is a fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. His research focuses on labor market economics, social mobility, access to education, and the sources of economic growth. His Brookings publications have included reports on hard-to-fill job vacancies, the value of STEM knowledge, skill mismatch, the role of inventive activity on regional growth, and the causes and consequences of school segregation. (“The Hidden STEM Economy” Brookings Institute, June 10^th, 2013. Available online at: http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/06/10-stem-economy-rothwell Accessed July 8th, 2015)

Workers in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields play a direct role in driving economic growth. Yet, because of how the STEM economy has been defined, policymakers have mainly focused on supporting workers with at least a bachelor’s (BA) degree, overlooking a strong potential workforce of those with less education but substantial STEM skills. An analysis of the occupational requirements for STEM knowledge finds that: As of 2011, 26 million U.S. jobs—20 percent of all jobs—require a high level of knowledge in any one STEM field. STEM jobs have doubled as a share of all jobs since the Industrial Revolution, from less than 10 percent in 1850 to 20 percent in 2010. Half of all STEM jobs are available to workers without a four-year college degree, and these jobs pay $53,000 on average—a wage 10 percent higher than jobs with similar educational requirements. Half of all STEM jobs are in manufacturing, health care, or construction industries. Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations constitute 12 percent of all STEM jobs, one of the largest occupational categories. Other blue-collar or technical jobs in fields such as construction and production also frequently demand STEM knowledge. STEM jobs that require at least a bachelor’s degree are highly clustered in certain metropolitan areas, while sub-bachelor’s STEM jobs are prevalent in every large metropolitan area. Of large metro areas, San Jose, CA, and Washington, D.C., have the most STEM-based economies, but Baton Rouge, LA, Birmingham, AL, and Wichita, KS, have among the largest share of STEM jobs in fields that do not require four-year college degrees. These sub-bachelor’s STEM jobs pay relatively high wages in every large metropolitan area. Share of workers in STEM occupations, 100 largest metro areas More STEM-oriented metropolitan economies perform strongly on a wide variety of economic indicators, from innovation to employment. Job growth, employment rates, patenting, wages, and exports are all higher in more STEM-based economies. The presence of sub-bachelor’s degree STEM workers helps boost innovation measures one-fourth to one-half as much as bachelor’s degree STEM workers, holding other factors constant. Concentrations of these jobs are also associated with less income inequality. This report presents a new and more rigorous way to define STEM occupations, and in doing so presents a new portrait of the STEM economy. Of the $4.3 billion spent annually by the federal government on STEM education and training, only one-fifth goes towards supporting sub-bachelor’s level training, while twice as much supports bachelor’s or higher level-STEM careers. The vast majority of National Science Foundation spending ignores community colleges. In fact, STEM knowledge offers attractive wage and job opportunities to many workers with a post-secondary certificate or associate’s degree. Policy makers and leaders can do more to foster a broader absorption of STEM knowledge to the U.S workforce and its regional economies.

Empowering Women to Play a Larger Role in the STEM Sector Results in Strong Economic Growth and Productivity

Yoo 14—Tae Yoo is the Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs at Cisco. Ms. Yoo drives Cisco's corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs through public-private partnerships that use technology to create positive, sustainable change in economic and workforce development, education, healthcare, and critical human needs. As the steward of Cisco's CSR vision, she directs Cisco's business, technical, and financial assets to make a positive impact for people and communities around the world. She has been with Cisco for more than 20 years. (“How Empowering Women In STEM Can Spur Economic Development” The Huffington Post, January 13th, 2014, Available online at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tae-yoo/how-empowering-women-in-i_b_4555794.html, Accessed 7/8/15)

It's a startling pair of statistics: When women are able to earn an income, they typically reinvest 90 percent of it back into their families and communities. And, for every year a girl stays in school, her future earnings will increase exponentially. These numbers, from the World Bank and the Council on Foreign Relations, respectively, highlight a simple, common-sense truth: The more time a girl spends in the classroom, the higher the return on investment for her time, and the beneficiaries are stronger families and communities. Over the past two decades we've seen significant progress made in promoting girls' education around the world. Thanks to ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals, among other actions, there is a greater understanding among developed and developing countries that women play a vital role in society and the economy, and that role is significantly enhanced when they are educated. And, the longer a girl stays in school, the greater the impact. The Council on Foreign Relations finds that "one additional year of primary education alone can increase a girl's future wages by 10 to 20 percent, while an extra year of secondary school adds another 15 to 25 percent." There are still millions of girls and women -- especially in developing countries -- who don't have the information, resources or skills they need to be part of the global economy. Keeping them out of the educational loop -- for social, cultural, or economic reasons -- means that half the population can't contribute to their community's economic growth. One of the most compelling arguments for encouraging the education of girls, particularly in developing countries, is this: Education enables jobs, jobs are a source of economic growth, and economic growth is a key to development and stability. As educated girls become women, they can transform local communities and act as role models for younger girls. And, according to the World Bank's findings, when women reinvest that 90 percent of their income back into their families and communities, it is most typically spent acquiring "food, health care, home improvement and schooling for themselves and their children." But, we mustn't only be educating girls in basic literacy. We should be preparing them for the jobs of the future, particularly in the science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) sectors. Over the past decade, new technologies like smart phones, tablet computers and cloud computing have transformed the way we live and interact on a global scale. We can be certain that future technology will continue to play a defining role in all our economic futures. In fact, computer networking skills are, according to the industry analyst IDC, "the global currency of 21st century economies," but there is a significant shortage of people equipped with these skills. ICT careers are in high demand everywhere at the moment and are expected to continue to be an important part of global job growth. Jobs in the public sector are increasingly dependent on technology and more and more government services are available online, in developed and developing countries. Women who have ICT skills can help develop and deliver these services, even in places where the sexes are traditionally kept separate. Equipping a girl with even rudimentary ICT skills can make a difference in her productivity when she grows up, and this is especially true in developing regions and even in jobs that are viewed as "low-tech." For women who produce handicrafts or textiles, for example, knowing how to access the internet can be an efficient way to get to market -- whether selling locally, regionally, or even internationally -- and can offer a pathway to microloans and other banking services, especially in remote areas that may be far from brick-and-mortar financial institutions. Similarly, women who are involved in agriculture, which continues to be a major part of rural economies throughout the developing world, can use basic ICT skills to access online resources that help them discover new techniques, anticipate weather conditions, understand crop pricing and so on. Women who have the devices and the technical know-how to access and navigate the internet can learn how to produce larger, healthier crops and will reap the economic benefits in the process. Since girls and women represent 50 percent of the world population, enabling them to participate in their local economies helps broaden the employment pool. The world needs thinkers, leaders and doers more than ever, so neglecting the minds of half the population means a lost opportunity to benefit from their ideas, contributions and actions. Educating girls and women and equipping them with ICT skills offers a clear return on investment for society: stronger families, stronger communities, stronger economies.

Education standards key to economic competitiveness

Swezey 10 Devon Swezey, former Project Director at the Breakthrough Institute from 2009-2012, where he directed the Innovation and the Economy project and worked as an analyst on economic and clean energy policy, 2010 (“"Gathering Storm" Threatens U.S. Competitiveness” September 27^th, 2010 Available online at http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/gathering_storm_threatens_us_c Accessed on July 6th, 2015.)

A new National Academies report released last week confirms what many concerned with U.S. economic competitiveness have warily suspected: America's competitive standing in the 21st century global economy has deteriorated markedly in the last five years. The report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited: Rapidly Approaching Category Five, is an update to a landmark 2005 report that warned of urgent competitiveness challenges ahead and led to the passage of the America COMPETES Act of 2007--an effort to strengthen the nation's science and technology-based capabilities. The outlook has only worsened since the publication of the original report, according to the Gathering Storm committee, which includes leading academics, CEOs, and science and technology experts. For those concerned about America's ability to create lasting, high-paying, high-quality jobs in a time of economic distress, the report's conclusion is disheartening: "America's competitive position in the world now faces even greater challenges, exacerbated by the economic turmoil of the last few years and by the rapid and persistent worldwide advanced of education, knowledge, innovation, investment, and industrial infrastructure. Indeed the governments of many other countries in Europe and Asia have themselves acknowledged and aggressively pursued many of the key recommendations of Rising Above the Gathering Storm, often more vigorously than has the U.S." The report attributes declining U.S. competitiveness to major underinvestment in scientific research and education as other nations make progress on key competitiveness indicators, affecting America's relative ability to compete for new factories, research facilities, and jobs. Federal government funding of R&D as a percentage of GDP has declined by 60 percent in 40 years, and the United States has fallen to 8th among nations in R&D investment on a per-GDP basis. Overall, U.S. R&D investment declined at an annual rate of 0.5 percent from 2001 to 2007. In priority sectors like energy, R&D spending has languished at low levels for decades. By 2008, public investment in energy R&D was less than half of what it was three decades ago. Today, U.S. consumers spend significantly more on potato chips than the federal government commits to R&D, according to the report. Meanwhile, China has increased its R&D investment as a fraction of GDP at an annual rate of 5.7 percent from 2001 to 2007, which, along with a greater number of students educated in science and engineering disciplines, is allowing the country to attract a greater share of private research investment and create a greater number of high-tech jobs. Indeed, China has now replaced the United States as the world's largest high-tech exporter, with 20 percent of global high-tech exports. Reductions in federal funding for research, coupled with increasing strains on the budgets of America's universities--which perform a large share of the nation's research--can be expected to make U.S. universities and research facilities less attractive as partners for private sector firms. Overall, the National Science Foundation finds that U.S.-based firms now have 23 percent of their R&D employment located abroad, an increasing trend that is likely to continue. The iconic American firm GE now locates the majority of its R&D personnel outside of the United States. In another high-profile example, Silicon Valley firm Applied Materials recently constructed the world's largest non-governmental solar energy R&D facility in China. Sustained Public Investment is Critical to Averting Competitiveness Crisis Stemming the dramatic decline in U.S. economic competitiveness and maintaining national capabilities to create high-tech, high-paying jobs in the 21st century will require a major commitment to investment in technology, education, and innovation, suggests the report. The authors warn that while the U.S. stimulus legislation provided much-needed investments in long-term research infrastructure, those investments will soon expire, and do not represent the kind of sustained investment necessary to keep the country competitive. The report notes that federal investments formed the basis for America's relative technological preeminence in past decades--such as the GI Bill and the Apollo program--by motivating young people to pursue careers in science and engineering and laying the foundation for generations of economic prosperity. In today's 21st century knowledge economy, such investments are even more critical to economic success. Indeed, many other countries have copied this American model with great results. Today, however, a wave of anti-government ideology threatens to erode support for the public-private investment paradigm that drove economic growth throughout the 20th century and will be critical to restoring American competitiveness in the future. The authors conclude, "the United States appears to be on a course that will lead to a declining, not growing, standard of living for our children and grandchildren." Without a renewed commitment to investment in innovation, that course may become all the more difficult to reverse.

State Education Standards Key to Global Economic Competitiveness and STEM Career Readiness

Elzey 10—Karen Elzey is the vice president, at the Institute for a Competitive Workforce “Education: The Key to Global Competitiveness” May 17th, 2010 http://www.uschamberfoundation.org/newsletter-article/education-key-global-competitiveness

As accountants say, it’s all in the numbers. Consider these figures: As of January 2010, the United States’ jobless rate stood at 9.7 percent. Yet for individuals with a bachelor’s degree or higher, the rate was substantially less — 4.9 percent. Conversely, for people who lack a high school diploma, the rate was noticeably higher — 15.2 percent. Clearly, education matters. And it matters not just for the job seeker. America’s future in the global marketplace is at stake, too. The United States faces challenges on myriad education fronts. High school graduation rates are depressingly low, college remediation rates are rising, adult literacy levels are too low, and the numbers of Americans earning advanced degrees in science and engineering are lower than they have been in years. High school dropout rates in the United States are at or near 30 percent. For African American and Hispanic students, the rate is even higher — a staggering 50 percent. Even for those who do graduate from high school and make their way to college, many require some kind of remedial instruction. America’s leaders are beginning to gauge the seriousness of the issue. In his 2009 address to a joint session of Congress, President< Obama pledged that “by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.” This will be a significant challenge. Of the nation’s 307 million people, 93 million adults do not possess the necessary literacy levels to enter either postsecondary education or job-training programs, according to the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. DEMANDING JOBS Making matters even more challenging, the educational attainment level required for jobs continues to rise. Anthony Carnevale, Director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, estimates that by 2018, nearly two-thirds of all jobs in the United States will require some form of postsecondary education or training. In 1973, just 28 percent of jobs, or less than one-third, required such instruction. The demand for workers to obtain meaningful credentials has never been more important. America’s education system is critical in this effort. The United States has long prided itself on its leadership in innovation. Much of this innovation has come from expertise in science and engineering. America’s lengthy run atop the innovation scoreboard, some suggest, might be near the end. They point to the fact that the nation’s science and engineering workforce is aging. A serious skills shortage in these fields could be imminent if not enough graduates are produced to replace retiring scientists and engineers. KNOWLEDGE FOR THE ECONOMY The implications are wide ranging, even affecting national security. For example, many jobs in U.S. defense industries require that an American citizen fill the position. According to the National Science Board’s Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 report, students from abroad attending American colleges in 2007 received 24 percent of master’s degrees in science and engineering, and 33 percent of doctoral degrees in the two disciplines. Fifty-five percent of all postdoctoral students in science and engineering in fall 2005 were temporary visa holders, according to the Board. A shortage of workers for information-sensitive positions is a possibility. The United States Patent and Trademark Office tells a similar story. In a report issued in 2009 by IFI Patent Intelligence, 51 percent of new patents went to companies outside the United States. Although IBM® received the most patents of any company (4,186 patents), overall, American firms seem to be slipping: Of the 10 companies receiving the most patents in 2008, only four were American. An economy that emphasizes knowledge requires that everyone should be able to decipher, synthesize and analyze information, and then convey it — clearly and concisely. Innovation and problem solving are built upon such thinking. SUPPORTING INNOVATION Not long ago, America topped the list of many key education and innovation indicators. Today, looking at the same indicators, America is a nation falling behind. And since global competitiveness is certainly a top priority for the nation’s businesses, we need to fix the problem. Simply stated, the United States cannot compete without strong national policies that support innovation. These policies include: increasing the focus on science, technology, engineering and math education implementing internationally benchmarked standards and assessments to reflect readiness for college, the workplace and the global marketplace aligning high school graduation requirements, state academic achievement standards and postsecondary entrance requirements leveraging data systems to inform instruction, improve teaching, and aid interventions ensuring that job training is relevant for jobs that exist today and for jobs in the future For the United States to stay competitive globally, the American education system — from pre-kindergarten through high school to postsecondary education and jobtraining programs — must adopt a can-do attitude regarding such policies. Human capital is the country’s greatest asset. This asset must be nurtured for the nation to reach its full potential. It’s time for the nation to take a full accounting of its education system. The numbers do not lie.

Bringing more women into the STEM field is not only an economic issue but a national security issue

Bidwell 14— Allie Bidwell is an education reporter for U.S. News & World Report. (“The Lack of Women in STEM Is a National Security Issue” U.S. News and World Report, September 9^th, 2014, Available online at http://www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2014/09/09/attracting-more-women-to-stem-fields-is-a-matter-of-national-security Accessed 7/10/15)

Attracting more women to study science, technology, engineering and math isn't just an aspirational goal for education leaders and the business community – it's a "national security prerogative," according to the chief operating officer of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. It's no secret that women and minorities are significantly underrepresented in the STEM fields. Although women make up about half of the American workforce, they represent less than one-quarter of those employed in STEM fields, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. Part of the key to overcoming that disparity, the NGA's Ellen McCarthy said, is continually showing young girls the options available to them in different fields, and engaging them in occupations that might be more meaningful. McCarthy, head of the NGA's daily business operations, said during a town hall discussion hosted by FedScoop on Tuesday that parents, teachers and the public and private business sectors all have a responsibility to push children to think outside the box when it comes to education and career pathways. McCarthy joined two others – Mary Jean Schmitt, business development manager at NetApp, and Veda Woods, chief intelligence security officer and chief intelligence officer of the Recovery and Accountability and Transparency Board – to discuss what business leaders can do to ensure young women are aware of the different opportunities in STEM fields. Jennifer Nowell, U.S. public sector senior director for Symantec, moderated the panel discussion. "This is not something that’s just nice, let’s go study science ... or data curation because that’s where you’re going to get a job. It’s a national security prerogative," McCarthy said. "For the NGA and for the broader intelligence community right now, it is imperative that we keep in front of this incredible technology revolution that we’re living in right now." The NGA is a federal agency that provides geospatial intelligence – information about human activity on earth gathered by analyzing different forms of imagery – to policymakers, the military and first responders. As McCarthy described it, if the National Security Agency is the "ears" of the federal government, the NGA is its "eyes." "We are getting tens of thousands of millions of bits of data that we never got before, and the ability to cull through that data and find those little nuggets of information that’s going to save a life or enable a policy to make the right decision, it’s just so critically important," McCarthy said. "If we don’t bring those skills into the public and private sector, we will fall behind and we will ultimately lose lives. I don’t think that’s an outcome that any of us want in this country." Demand for workers in the STEM fields outstrips supply by a wide margin and yet, despite more than a decade's worth of effort, the country is not significantly further along in meeting that need, according to the U.S. News/Raytheon STEM Index. The speakers acknowledged that many women never pursue careers in STEM fields in the first place because they feel disinterested or discouraged from doing so. Showing young women that there are different paths is part of drawing them in. Woods, whose agency provides oversight over federal stimulus money, such as Hurricane Sandy relief funds, said that when she visits disadvantaged schools, for instance, many students say they were unaware of the types of careers she discusses with them, or the fact that other interests, such as art and design, can also translate into careers in the STEM fields. "There are a lot of opportunities out there," Woods said. "We just have to be able to communicate with them and show them that." Likewise, NetApp's Schmitt said pursuing educational backgrounds in other subject areas doesn't necessarily preclude someone from ending up in a STEM field. "It’s very important that we let our daughters, our sisters and young women know that they don’t have to rule out that liberal arts type of degree or that liberal arts type of pursuit," Schmitt said. "They don’t have to be a rocket scientist to be in technology." McCarthy said government agencies, particularly those with science, technology, engineering and math focuses, need to do a better job of inspiring young women to pursue careers in those fields. "Working in the intelligence business – it doesn't get a lot cooler," McCarthy said. "The sense of accomplishment you feel for supporting a mission … when a baby is saved and you know it was the information you provided that police officer or that first responder … how much better does that get?" "I fell into it. But those were the days where women weren't pushed into [STEM fields]," McCarthy later said. "Now girls can plan their future – they don't have to just fall into it."

Economic decline risks global nuclear conflicts – studies confirm.

Ferguson 9 (Niall, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University, “The Axis of Upheaval,” Foreign Policy, February 16th, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/02/16/the_axis_of_upheaval)

The Bush years have of course revealed the perils of drawing facile parallels between the challenges of the present day and the great catastrophes of the 20th century. Nevertheless, there is reason to fear that the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression could have comparable consequences for the international system. For more than a decade, I pondered the question of why the 20th century was characterized by so much brutal upheaval. I pored over primary and secondary literature. I wrote more than 800 pages on the subject. And ultimately I concluded, in The War of the World, that three factors made the location and timing of lethal organized violence more or less predictable in the last century. The first factor was ethnic disintegration: Violence was worst in areas of mounting ethnic tension. The second factor was economic volatility: The greater the magnitude of economic shocks, the more likely conflict was. And the third factor was empires in decline: When structures of imperial rule crumbled, battles for political power were most bloody. In at least one of the world’s regions—the greater Middle East—two of these three factors have been present for some time: Ethnic conflict has been rife there for decades, and following the difficulties and disappointments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States already seems likely to begin winding down its quasi-imperial presence in the region. It likely still will. Now the third variable, economic volatility, has returned with a vengeance. U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s “Great Moderation”—the supposed decline of economic volatility that he hailed in a 2004 lecture—has been obliterated by a financial chain reaction, beginning in the U.S. subprime mortgage market, spreading through the banking system, reaching into the “shadow” system of credit based on securitization, and now triggering collapses in asset prices and economic activity around the world. After nearly a decade of unprecedented growth, the global economy will almost certainly sputter along in 2009, though probably not as much as it did in the early 1930s, because governments worldwide are frantically trying to repress this new depression. But no matter how low interest rates go or how high deficits rise, there will be a substantial increase in unemployment in most economies this year and a painful decline in incomes. Such economic pain nearly always has geopolitical consequences. Indeed, we can already see the first symptoms of the coming upheaval. In the essays that follow, Jeffrey Gettleman describes Somalia’s endless anarchy, Arkady Ostrovsky analyzes Russia’s new brand of aggression, and Sam Quinones explores Mexico’s drug-war-fueled misery. These, however, are just three case studies out of a possible nine or more. In Gaza, Israel has engaged in a bloody effort to weaken Hamas. But whatever was achieved militarily must be set against the damage Israel did to its international image by killing innocent civilians that Hamas fighters use as human shields. Perhaps more importantly, social and economic conditions in Gaza, which were already bad enough, are now abysmal. This situation is hardly likely to strengthen the forces of moderation among Palestinians. Worst of all, events in Gaza have fanned the flames of Islamist radicalism throughout the region—not least in Egypt. From Cairo to Riyadh, governments will now think twice before committing themselves to any new Middle East peace initiative. Iran, meanwhile, continues to support both Hamas and its Shiite counterpart in Lebanon, Hezbollah, and to pursue an alleged nuclear weapons program that Israelis legitimately see as a threat to their very existence. No one can say for sure what will happen next within Tehran’s complex political system, but it is likely that the radical faction around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be strengthened by the Israeli onslaught in Gaza. Economically, however, Iran is in a hole that will only deepen as oil prices fall further. Strategically, the country risks disaster by proceeding with its nuclear program, because even a purely Israeli air offensive would be hugely disruptive. All this risk ought to point in the direction of conciliation, even accommodation, with the United States. But with presidential elections in June, Ahmadinejad has little incentive to be moderate. On Iran’s eastern border, in Afghanistan, upheaval remains the disorder of the day. Fresh from the success of the “surge” in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, the new head of U.S. Central Command, is now grappling with the much more difficult problem of pacifying Afghanistan. The task is made especially difficult by the anarchy that prevails in neighboring Pakistan. India, meanwhile, accuses some in Pakistan of having had a hand in the Mumbai terrorist attacks of last November, spurring yet another South Asian war scare. Remember: The sabers they are rattling have nuclear tips. The democratic governments in Kabul and Islamabad are two of the weakest anywhere. Among the biggest risks the world faces this year is that one or both will break down amid escalating violence. Once again, the economic crisis is playing a crucial role. Pakistan’s small but politically powerful middle class has been slammed by the collapse of the country’s stock market. Meanwhile, a rising proportion of the country’s huge population of young men are staring unemployment in the face. It is not a recipe for political stability. This club is anything but exclusive. Candidate members include Indonesia, Thailand, and Turkey, where there are already signs that the economic crisis is exacerbating domestic political conflicts. And let us not forget the plague of piracy in Somalia, the renewed civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the continuing violence in Sudan’s Darfur region, and the heart of darkness that is Zimbabwe under President Robert Mugabe. The axis of upheaval has many members. And it’s a fairly safe bet that the roster will grow even longer this year. The problem is that, as in the 1930s, most countries are looking inward, grappling with the domestic consequences of the economic crisis and paying little attention to the wider world crisis. This is true even of the United States, which is now so preoccupied with its own economic problems that countering global upheaval looks like an expensive luxury. With the U.S. rate of GDP growth set to contract between 2 and 3 percentage points this year, and with the official unemployment rate likely to approach 10 percent, all attention in Washington will remain focused on a nearly $1 trillion stimulus package. Caution has been thrown to the wind by both the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. The projected deficit for 2009 is already soaring above the trillion-dollar mark, more than 8 percent of GDP. Few commentators are asking what all this means for U.S. foreign policy. The answer is obvious: The resources available for policing the world are certain to be reduced for the foreseeable future. That will be especially true if foreign investors start demanding higher yields on the bonds they buy from the United States or simply begin dumping dollars in exchange for other currencies. Economic volatility, plus ethnic disintegration, plus an empire in decline: That combination is about the most lethal in geopolitics. We now have all three. The age of upheaval starts now

Decline magnifies the severity of other conflicts – WWII proves

Miller ‘8 G. Robert M. Miller, journalist for Digital Journal, 10-25, 2008, “Guns vs. Shovels – The Central Question Behind Our Next Economy,” online: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/261595

But before we look at the modern ‘Guns versus Butter’ model, it first has to be noted that this phrase was originally popularized in a time where securing economic prosperity was a primary concern in nearly every nation. More importantly, when these nations did experience economic collapse, nearly all of them chose Guns. There is no question that Nazi aggression spawned World War II, however, what was happening in Europe became a world war for a purpose as central to the heart of the capitalist as was the instantaneous end of the holocaust to the heart of the compassionate; economic prosperity. Simply said, big wars are big money; and to truly break from the embrace of the Great Depression, a big commitment to the economy was necessary. And due to the leadership that guided the balance between ‘Guns and Butter’ in the US through World War II, the economy was considerably improved; this was true for many western nations.

Economic decline cause nuclear war.

Bearden 2K (Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army, 2000, The Unnecessary Energy Crisis: How We Can Solve It, 2000, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Big- Medicine/message/642)

Bluntly, we foresee these factors - and others { } not covered - converging to a catastrophic collapse of the world economy in about eight years. As the collapse of the Western economies nears, one may expect catastrophic stress on the 160 developing nations as the developed nations are forced to dramatically curtail orders. International Strategic Threat Aspects History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China - whose long range nuclear missiles can reach the United States - attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual treaties involved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies have shown for decades that, under such extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potential adversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy of the MAD concept is his side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all, is to launch immediate full-bore pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and massively as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs, with a great percent of the WMD arsenals being unleashed . The resulting great Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for many decades.

Directory: file -> view
view -> Western Europe after wwii
view -> Author study: paul fleischman
view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide
view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg
view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh
view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce
view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy
view -> Table of Contents Lesson #
view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad

Download 0.81 Mb.

Share with your friends: