But we are sitting on a precious moment to finally get it right.
Let’s first talk about how the U.S. stacks up internationally. On the two widely respected assessments, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), U.S. rankings have consistently remained in the middle range over the past 30 years. In the TIMSS 8th-grade science assessment, the United States ranked 17th out of 41 countries in 1995 and improved to 11th in 2019. On the PISA assessment for 15-year-olds, the United States ranked 14th in science in 2000 and dropped to 18th in 2018. In science, we just can't crack the top tier.
Let’s look at our own assessments of student performance. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),better known as the Nation’s Report Card, has shown limited progress in reducing the number of students performing at the Below Basic level in science.
Grade Level | 2009 | 2015 | 2019 | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
4th Grade Science | 28% Below Basic | 24% Below Basic | 27% Below Basic | Initial decline, then slight increase |
8th Grade Science | 37% Below Basic | 32% Below Basic | 32% Below Basic | Declined, then stagnant |
12th Grade Science | 41% Below Basic | 41% Below Basic | 41% Below Basic | Stagnant |
📉 What does "Below Basic" mean? These students lack even partial mastery of fundamental science knowledge and skills for their grade level.
It's worth noting that the 2024 NAEP results just came out and show declines in reading and math proficiency across the board. In reading, only 67% of 8th graders and 60% of 4th graders met basic reading skills—the lowest levels in 32 years. In math, scores declined compared to pre-pandemic levels. Historically, NAEP science scores have closely correlated with reading and math performance. Given the steep declines in both subjects, we can reasonably predict that the Fall 2025 NAEP science scores will also drop—further underscoring the urgent need for a new approach to science education.
So… Sputnik: The launch of this Russian satellite in 1957 shook our national sense of security and pride, triggering heavy investment and significant reforms aimed at bolstering the nation's scientific prowess.
The U.S. government enacted the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, allocating substantial funds to enhance education in science, mathematics, and foreign languages. This act provided low-interest student loans, improved school infrastructure, and supported teacher training programs.
Concurrently, the National Science Foundation (NSF) invested heavily in developing new curricula and teacher development programs. Over two decades, the NSF spent approximately $500 million on these initiatives, leading to the creation of innovative science materials and teaching methods.
Despite these efforts, the anticipated substantial gains in student science achievement were not fully realized. While there were improvements in resources and curricula, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessments from the 1960s through the 1980s reported only modest advancements in student performance.
Even following the famous Nation at Risk report published in 1983 that warned of a “rising tide of mediocrity” in education and called for urgent reform, NAEP results from the late 1980s and early 1990s revealed little significant upward movement.
But there is reason to be hopeful despite 60 years of “reforming.” America is amidst a once-in-a-century moment to get science right.
We believe the alternative, out-of-system space—led by public and private microschools and community schools—will be at the forefront of this transformation. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the monotony and lack of engagement in traditional schooling, leading many families to seek more personalized and flexible educational options. Teacher morale has declined, with increasing numbers leaving the profession, and student absenteeism is on the rise. As Thomas Arnett of the Christensen Institute observes, "The complex web of relationships and expectations that shape most schools—referred to in innovation theory as their value networks, the entrenched structures that keep schools operating as they always have—create formidable barriers to change." In contrast, alternative education models are emerging as agile and responsive solutions, capable of implementing innovative practices that traditional systems often resist.
And guess what? The very forces driving these seismic shifts in our education system are consistent with what we know are the best practices for science education. At the heart of homeschooling, microschools, and community schools are principles like learner-centered approaches, student agency, and the fostering of tight-knit, supportive communities—all of which are proven to boost focus, motivation, and academic achievement.
These agile solutions and innovative practices align with what we know about how kids actually learn, what drives intrinsic motivation, and what makes school enjoyable—a place where students want to go. Smaller, community-driven schools are inherently designed to foster these conditions. Inquiry-based learning, project-based approaches, and problem-posing methods set the right intellectual tone, sparking curiosity and deepening retention. Tinkering-based and hands-on laboratory explorations captivate students and drive focus, while the freedom to boldly formulate ideas and theories—without the looming threat of a bad grade—creates a safe space for intellectual risk-taking. These are the practices that make science education not just effective, but inspiring and deeply engaging for students—and these are the practices many microschools are designed around.
I believe America can be #1 in the world in K-12 science—not by doubling down on outdated methods but by embracing innovative approaches that work. I further believe our kids can have fun getting to #1, especially if they are running fascinating, captivating lab experiments week after week in school!
As Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.” Science literacy and critical thinking are essential to our democracy, and this new era of educational freedom has given us a rare, precious moment to get it right.
Sources & References
1️⃣ Sputnik’s Impact on U.S. Education Reform
National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958 – U.S. Senate Archives
The Race to Space Rocked NSF into Classrooms – Education Week
Sputnik’s Legacy for U.S. Science Education – NPR
2️⃣ Long-Term Student Performance & NAEP Science Scores
NAEP Science Scores (2009–2019) – National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
2024 NAEP Math & Reading Declines – AP News
PISA 2022 Science Rankings – FactCheck.org
3️⃣ Expert Commentary on Science Education
Rebecca Miller on Science & National Security – Harvard Gazette
John Rudolph on Pre-Sputnik Education Reforms – Harvard Gazette
Excellent piece, Michael!
This article is right on target not only for science and American education but also for the current political and world economic status. I can only hope all educators and politicians read it, understand it and do something positive about it.