S1-09: Supporting K–8 science students in the digital world: Ricky Mason

Podcast cover for "Science Connections," Season 1, Episode 9, featuring "Ricky Mason" discussing K–8 science education. Includes a globe illustration and decorative science-themed elements.

In this episode, Eric sits down with Ricky Mason, chief executive officer of BrainSTEM. Ricky shares his passion for inspiring students into science careers, and his path from an engineering career with organizations like the Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Central Intelligence Agency to starting BrainSTEM, an education program that develops creative digital tools to enable all teachers and students to dive deeper into STEM content. Ricky and Eric talk about representation in science classrooms and the importance of embedding fun within K–8 science content! Explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page.

Download Transcript

Ricky Mason (00:00):

I feel like comfort is where dreams go to die. And I’m still dreaming every night. So I’ll wake up, chasing them.

Eric Cross (00:08):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. My guest today is Ricky Mason. Ricky is an engineer whose career included lead roles at the Department of Defense, NASA, and the CIA. Ricky transitioned to education as an adjunct faculty at the University of Kentucky. And while there, he founded BrainSTEM, an edtech company that developed a 3D virtual reality metaverse for STEM education. Today, BrainSTEM serves public school districts, private schools, and nonprofits. And in this episode, we discuss what led Ricky to creating BrainSTEM Metaversity, and how he’s using the metaverse to transform STEM learning for students. And now please enjoy my conversation with Ricky Mason. How did you, so like maybe going back doing your origin story, maybe you can talk about it, but brother, you don’t sleep. Talk about keep making moves, your hashtag, I mean, I was looking at your LinkedIn profiles, looking at your details. You get after it. I was getting tired just reading it. I was like John Hopkins, electrical engineering, real estate, starting companies. You must have that gene where it’s like four hours of sleep and then you’re like, ready to go.

Ricky Mason (01:19):

Yeah, man. My mom told me if I didn’t stay busy, then I’m in trouble. So when I was about 14, she told me that. I said, well, Mama, I guess I’m gonna stay busy then. And yeah, man, that’s just been my life. I feel like if I don’t keep making moves, then I’m in trouble. So, feel like comfort is where dreams go to die and I’m still dreaming every night. So I’ll wake up chasing them.

Eric Cross (01:44):

I feel like a kindred spirit with you. So, were you always interested in STEM like, was there something like a moment or a year where you remember you were like, this is my jam. This is what I’m gonna get into.

Ricky Mason (01:57):

Yeah, man. When it really clicked for me was in the fifth grade. I was at a school assembly and an IBM engineer came in and he brought a robot and he programmed it with punch cards right on the stage. And I got the opportunity to come up andyou know, put one of the punch cards in the robot to program it. And I asked him, I’m like, what is your job? He said, I’m a robotics engineer. And I went home right after that assembly and I said, Mom, that’s what I wanna do, become a robotics engineer. And my mom would take me to the libraries. Well, I felt like I was getting outta bible study on Wednesdays by going to the library. So I went there and I started researching robots.

Ricky Mason (02:39):

And at the time the robots that were popular were all being sent to space. And it was the spiritless. It was being sent to Mars. And I said, Mom, well, I guess I gotta become an astronaut if I’m gonna be a robotics engineer. And that’s kind of what set me out on that dream. And my mom started trying to find outlets for me to get involved in STEM, but it was really tough to find those outlets, you know, especially in that fifth to eighth grade range here in Kentucky. So that was kind of where it started for me man, when I knew that yeah, engineering is what I wanna do.

Eric Cross (03:14):

What does an electrical engineer do? I imagine there’s different types of specialties, but like, was there something that you specialize in that you focused on or was it, is it just kind of like a generalist field?

Ricky Mason (03:23):

Yeah, so I would say, yeah, man, it’s a huge field. So you could be doing anything from, you know, power, like power coming into your house. So those large power systems all the way down to nanotechnology and microchips. I like to tell people I’m a real full stack engineer, so my wheelhouse is kind of from the PCD, the little green computer chips, all the way to the cloud. Over my career, I’ve had some pretty cool jobs. One of those things was I was a test engineer for the army. So I got to test weapons up at Aberdeen Proving Ground for the Army. So I got to drive those weapons and test them before they went to theater there. After that,I worked at United Launch Alliance down at Cape Canaveral where I launched five rockets.

Ricky Mason (04:07):

So I was a part of the electrical ground systems team there where we were responsible for all of the electrical systems on the rocket while it was on the pad. Somonitoring the temperature of the rocket, the fuel, the entire system for safety while it was on that pad. And then finally I worked at the CIA as a computer engineer building data centers and as a data center architect for some of our remote systems and virtualizing our systems. So kind of had a broad spectrum of things there. And then finally coming back to the University of Kentucky as a research engineer and faculty. I developed drone technology for monitoring crops. So flying drones over crops with LIDAR, just like self-driving cars with high-definition cameras to pull in data about those crops, to help farmers determine about pesticides fertilizers, and the overall health of their crops from a remote location.

Eric Cross (05:10):

It’s so neat to hear you talk about it and to see how this is all built up to what you do now with BrainSTEM. How would you explain what BrainSTEM is? I know that’s your, that’s kind of your baby right now and what you’ve been working on a few years.

Ricky Mason (05:23):

Yeah, man, we started BrainSTEM in 2019 officially, but I would say BrainSTEM has been almost 10 years in coming. While I was in undergrad, I played football at the University of Kentucky. But I got hurt going into my sophomore year and that kind of shattered my dreams of football. And that’s when I really got back into engineering. One of my professors asked me to come to a robotics competition and I saw these third graders and sixth graders programming robots. And I’m like, oh my God, they’re programming robots! And I had no idea how to code or what to do with these things. And where was this a when I was a kid? And so I immediately bought one of those robots and taught myself how to program it <laugh> and then we started a robotics team in Lexington,there at a church.

Ricky Mason (06:10):

And we got a sponsorship from Lexmark to start that team. And that was kind of my first leap into STEM and teaching STEM and creating programs for students in STEM. I did that in undergrad and like I said, fast forward 10 years later, I’m teaching at the University of Kentucky and we’re struggling to recruit STEM students. Why aren’t students going into STEM? I hear too many adults tell me, oh man, I wish I would’ve done engineering, or I started out in engineering, but I left engineering or I wish I could go back to school for engineering or learn to code. And I’m like, I asked them like, why didn’t you do this? What happened? And often it’s like, it was the math. It was, oh, I didn’t get into it until I was in college. And I’m like, well, that’s the key.

Ricky Mason (06:52):

I knew I wanted to do this in the fifth grade. And I started with a plan in the fifth grade to achieve these goals and dreams. And I started doing that research and realizing that the same problem existed that I had. There was no outlet for kids to get involved in STEM, and so many kids have an affinity for STEM an early age. So we started BrainSTEM to provide access to STEM education and exposure STEM careers, STEM professionals, and just to STEM fields as a whole, because too often kids may know about the term, engineer, or the term, scientists, but they don’t really know what those people do or have a strong connection with the field or have any hands-on projects that they kind of done around those things or met anyone like me.

Ricky Mason (07:42):

I didn’t meet an engineer until I was in college. So that has really been impactful for some of the students that we’ve been able to touch. I had a family reach out to me. They moved to Lexington from California and they were like, man, I really want my ninth-grade son to get involved in engineering. So we started a weekend program with that one student and it went amazing. Like we competed in science fairs, we applied for different college programs and things like that. So it became an entire like mentorship program. And I’m proud to say that a year ago, he actually graduated with his bachelor’s in electrical engineering from your side of town, UCSB. It was just awesome to actually see this come full circle. And that’s kind of one of the first things that we did before we actually formalized as BrainSTEM University.

Eric Cross (08:34):

What will be like your elevator pitch for a teacher? If you were gonna say, this is what BrainSTEM does. I have the luxury of going through it on the site, but since we’re on a podcast, how would you kind of pitch it to people letting them know, like what, what does it do? Who does it serve?

Ricky Mason (08:47):

Yeah. So BrainSTEM provides STEM curriculum and STEM magnets for schools and nonprofits looking to increase access to STEM for K through 12 students. We also have launched our BrainSTEM Metaversity, a metaverse product for teachers to take their 2D Google classroom and convert it into a 3D metaverse classroom where students can collaborate during a 3D class. So all of your students show up as their avatars that they can select from our inventory of 150 avatars, and enjoy class in a 3D gameified Minecraft like World.

Eric Cross (09:26):

So I made my avatar by the way. It’s kind of tight, I have to say, it’s kind of tight. Hey, I’m gonna share. So those of you in the podcasts I’ll share it so you can see it. You’re not gonna be able to see it right now, but since I have the man himself I gotta share it with him just so I can get a reaction. So can you see that?

Ricky Mason (09:43):

Yeah. <laugh> That’s so good.

Eric Cross (09:44):

I feel like I wanna look like him though. I want him in real life. Like I want be able to switch to looking like my avatar

Ricky Mason (09:52):

<Laugh>

Eric Cross (09:54):

That was the first thing that I jumped on, when I went on your site, was making the avatar and I had so much fun doing it. I actually took longer than I probably wanna admit cause I was like customizing everything

Ricky Mason (10:03):

Yeah, man. It’s so fun. And that’s exactly what, you know, when you can show up as the person you want, it changes your whole being. I’ve seen kids that are quiet in class. They show up as their avatar and they’re talkative, they’re asking questions, they’re moving around the room, interacting with other kids. I feel like it’s almost like a superpower just to put your avatar on.

Eric Cross (10:25):

So what is something that a teacher could have their students go and learn or do if they, if they signed up,

Ricky Mason (10:31):

Let’s kick it off. So how we started with the metaverses, was teaching coding. So our first class was Minecraft and Python coding in the metaverse. So students showed up in the metaverse with our virtual instructor, that instructor led a lecture in the metaverse and then those students could collaborate on their Python games. So, they created and built the game in Python. We shared those games in the metaverse and we have our leaderboards that are in the metaverse, as they’re completing these challenges, including these games, then sharing them back in the metaverse with other students and getting that feedback on their game. So we’ve seen huge excitement from students when I can come back in and see my friend’s work. Like too often, students don’t get to see their work and that’s motivation to do better when I’m like, Jim’s gonna see my work. It’s amazing to see that motivation when students are sharing their work with other kids and not just their parent or just them and the teacher or seeing their grades. It’s been really cool to see.

Eric Cross (11:33):

You have that genuine audience too. Like that real-time feedback. And then like an authentic audience for students that makes everything seem, it takes it up a notch.

Ricky Mason (11:42):

Yeah, man. And then as we have built on this platform, so like you said with that avatar, so think if you created a really cool looking avatar and other students wanted to be that avatar, we have a way of sharing that avatar back into the world and in the inventory so that other students could then be your avatar. Or, if you create a world, we could then share that world back into the inventory, so the teacher could have class in a world that you created.

Eric Cross (12:07):

They’re creating content, not just consuming it. They’re actually creating content that could be shared across like grade levels or students.

Ricky Mason (12:14):

Well, we’re gonna say right now it’s just within your classroom. Eventually yes, we want students to be able to share that across school districts. At least we think that data will be probably limited to those kinds of realms as far as schools go. But you’ll be able to share this across sixth grade. We’ll be able to see what everyone in the sixth grade is doing in their STEM class or their game development class or their history class, per se, even if they’re giving back a presentation or what we have here in JCPS is backpack skills of success, where students are presenting on things that they’re learning that relate back to core competencies that the district is focused on. And I think that sharing those in the metaverse and doing those in the 3D world will be an awesome experience for students.

Eric Cross (12:56):

Are you seeing anything else as far as those skills that we see that are needed in coding? Is there something that the VR adds that was distinct from maybe just a kid with a Chromebook in his class that it’s just him in isolation doing the coding? Was there any like aha moments or surprises when they’re in the VR world doing this?

Ricky Mason (13:13):

I think the biggest thing is we could actually show them real examples of code working in other ways. Sofor example, if we’re working through loops, we can show them something looping. We can relate these functions to real-world things happening in the VR world so that they can see and better relate the actual concept with visuals, if that makes sense. So, you’re in loop Allen the whole time you’re learning about loops. You’re immersed in that kind of world. What we’ve seen is students really start to, you know, they it pick up and it clicks a lot faster because some of these concepts are so abstract for students to understand, when we can relate them to things in that world that they see that are in front of them, that they can grasp before we go to okay, type in “while” “”parentheses” <laugh> they can thenrelate that and pick up on those clues a lot better after they’ve seen those things in the world.

Eric Cross (14:09):

So they can actually visualize it in the metaverse. Whereas outside of it, it’s more just, just text-based coding and they’re not isolated. Like the first thing I’m thinking about is how like, with my own students, when they’re learning Sratch or Python, it’s not easy to share back and forth because they all are on individual accounts and they’d have to go on a different computer, or we’d have to find some way to publish it. And then all the kids would have to access it. But it sounds like in the metaversity classrooms, it’s easy for students in that same class to see each other’s work. Am I getting that right?

Ricky Mason (14:37):

Yeah. So most of our classrooms are limited to 24 students and in some of our breakout classrooms, we limit them to about eight students. Everybody can share their screen, so students can share their screen in the metaverse. They can share their video in the metaverse. They can share documents in the metaverse. They can share their, like I said, their code or anything that they want to share with other students. They can kind of do that. So it’s been a really cool product, I think, for students to almost find independence to work within a group, in an online setting. As they’ve been working through these problems online and remote it’s been really cool to see how they use the metaverse and break out. Even in a class, they can go off into a section because it’s all spacial. If you walk away, I can’t hear your conversation. So they can go into a little section within a metaverse class and have their own breakout. And a teacher can walk over to them. Okay. You guys are working over here. Let me walk to my next group. Just like in class. So it’s been really cool to see those students use the metaverse like that.

Eric Cross (15:41):

Just listening to you talk about this. One of the exciting things about emerging technologies or taking what the private sector does, and someone with a mind like yourself, and go, how do I use this for education? Like, that’s something that like excites me and you’ve run with it. But I just thought about, you’re doing an hour of code, you’ve created this metaverse, and you can bring in somebody, a professional into the metaverse, but they’re in, you know, the Bay area, but they could be a software engineer for Tesla or Google or anybody. Could they move around the metaverse and take a look at different students’ work and interact in that way.

Ricky Mason (16:17):

Yeah, man, we get in there. We make metaverse selfies. I drop Lambos in the metaverse, we take picture with Lambos. We have scavenger hunts in the metaverse. It’s a really awesome experience. And that’s one of the big things I think that is so powerful, is like you said, we could have that engineer, that celebrity, we could have Travis Scott, you know, in the world meeting thousands of kids motivating them because they met their STEM goals. They met their, you know, their testing school goals or whatever. These are things that kids really care about. If I get the Travis Scott avatar or the Elon Musk avatar, because I completed the Elon Musk rocket challenge, like that’s huge for me to show up in class as that avatar, like it’s just like Fortnite and it’s bringing all of those mechanics into the classroom.

Eric Cross (17:07):

When I hear you talk about the metaverse and I hear you talk about the potential of where you want to go with it, I think about my own students, and I think about, how they would really have a genuine interest and desire to want to do this and probably be doing it when they don’t have to, like at home at night wanting to go back into it and interact. And, you’re also building this virtual community. I mean, are you seeing that like, cause I’m hearing that?

Ricky Mason (17:28):

Yeah, man, building that community is huge. And I often tell people all the time, I want the STEM community to be just like the basketball community, the football community. I want students to have that camaraderie built around them for learning STEM and participating in STEM activities and competitions. Because when you see students out there at a robotics, they have the same zeal, the same, you know, everything that you find at a football competition. So we just have to get behind them and back those events with the same enthusiasm that we back sports. And that’s the environment that I want to create for STEM students and for that STEM community, because I longed for that community when I was in school. And like I said, I had it in football, but I wanted both. I wanted the best of both worlds. I wanted my robotics guys and my football guys to show up together here at the competition and have a good time.

Eric Cross (18:23):

You’re absolutely right. Like robotics STEM, these things, community helps fuel like people’s interest and working together. And it brings people from the outside who are seeking that community. Like, hey, my friends are doing this, I wanna kind of check it out. That’s how we recruit a wider swath of our population into it. So it’s not this kind of very narrow channel of folks who are going into STEM.

Ricky Mason (18:45):

If you can’t find that community. I mean for me, I felt like I was the only one playing football who was interested in robotics. So I never told anybody because I didn’t feel like that related to anybody within my vicinity. So I kept that to myself and that’s the biggest thing. I think if we get these kids just talking more about their interests, because a lot of them are interested in robotics and space and these STEM topics, but they don’t have anyone that’s really nudging them or asking them or piquing their interest in those spaces and saying, hey man, it’s okay to, you know, learn about robots. It’s okay to geek out on space. <Laugh> So that’s been my goal and that’s kind of why I felt like this was the time in my career for me to kind of do this, be a face for STEM education and inspire kids to chase their goals and dreams. Over my career, I’ve had some really cool jobs, but I felt like I could keep doing cool jobs, but I’m like at the right age to still connect with those students and inspire them to chase their dreams. And that’s why I feel like right now, man, it’s just an opportune time to get these students involved in STEM.

Eric Cross (20:01):

We don’t get that. Oftentimes, when we’re solely doing the cool job or simply in the private sector, we don’t get those experiences as much as we do when we’re able to actually serve our community or students or take our passion, our skill set, and use it to serve another person. I hear that like, as you describe what you’re doing now is like, there’s something beyond just, you know, the using your skills and doing cool stuff, but there’s something I hear. That’s helping people and actually doing something you believe in that resonates deeply in you. And I can hear it as you talk about it.

Ricky Mason (20:30):

It’s been just amazing to actually chart out that journey. Like I said, and like tell kids, like, no man, I’m from right up the block from you, cause I mean, I’m building this back at home in my hometown. And that’s the reason why I kind of came back to kind of do that in my hometown, because I really want to, you know, relate to those students and inspire, you know, students here. Nobody thinks about technology coming out of Kentucky and that’s been a gift and a curse, I guess, with launching BrainSTEM in Kentucky. When I first started, I said, we’re a STEM education company, people are asking me what is STEM? So, that was where we started out with this in 2019, all the way to, you know, hey, in 2020, we’re gonna launch a metaverse. A metaverse! What is that? It’s been amazing to try to change the minds of not only Kentuckians about STEM and the importance of STEM, but the world that a metaverse company is coming outta Kentucky. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (21:31):

The work that you’re doing and, it exists beyond you and you probably know this, but as a Black science educator out here in San Diego … We don’t see people who look like all of us in this work often, and I saw that you had created something, a network group, network and chill. And that was one of the things, we had touched on community, but I thought that that was so huge because we need each other.

Ricky Mason (21:55):

I feel like that was the biggest thing for us in engineering. Like I showed up to my first internship and I’m like, I mean, my boss was cool. Everything else was cool, but I just didn’t feel like, hey, this is a community for me. And I almost changed my major because of that. But I’m glad that I didn’t, it’s huge to have more of us represented in, in these spaces.

Eric Cross (22:16):

And you know, in engineering, especially when we look at the disproportionate, you know, men versus women. Like it’s not, you know, it’s not just culture, but it’s, you know, gender, all of these different things. And if we’re gonna change it, I think a program like yours that gets exposure to all kids and then giving them choice. What advice would you give to students? Or what advice I should say, do you give to students now? When you see like your younger self in the different kind of K12 grades who are thinking about their futures or they’re thinking about STEM, what do you say to them?

Ricky Mason (22:46):

So my biggest advice, man is start now. Whatever that big thing is, that big dream is that you have, what is that now? You’re thinking about planes. You’re thinking about robots. You’re thinking about RC cars, whatever that is. Let’s start now. Let’s get your hands on an RC car. Let’s take it apart. Let’s start coding. Let’s start thinking about those problems now. But the biggest thing is, is getting kids used to solving tough problems. Typically, most students that have an affinity for, you know, STEM — and you just know that that kid’s gonna go into, STEM — they’re problem solvers. They’re typically looking and seeking those tough problems and seeking opportunities to learn. That’s where I feel like it’s parents’ jobs to provide that environment to foster, that zeal. A five-year-old kid, we started our STEM program with them at the beginning of this month.

Ricky Mason (23:39):

The first day I came in after I told him I was a rocket scientist. And now he’s like, well, I wanna be a pilot. I said, if you pay attention to this class, we’re gonna get you started on your way to being a pilot. And he knows all the parts of a rocket and he knows a rocket needs an oxidizer. And he knows the fuselage, the wings, the wing flaps. He knows all the different parts of the plane and how the forces, the drag, the lift, the weight, he knows how those are working cause we talked about those in class and he has so much more confidence and it came all to fruition when a kid said, wow, I thought it was gonna be really hard to be a robotics engineer. And I’m like, no, that’s not gonna be that hard. That is exactly what we set out to do when we started BrainSTEM, was to break down those barriers and those walls and build that confidence and say, look man, you can do this. It’s easy.

Eric Cross (24:26):

Society doesn’t help much either because one of our terms, right, if something’s really hard, or if something’s not hard, we say it’s not rocket science. That implies that rocket science is really hard and inaccessible. If kids would hear that it kind of instills in their brain, okay. It’s really hard, it’s probably too hard for me. To that point to parents, it sounds like a lot of just exposure, like giving students the opportunity to be able to be exposed to these things and letting them create wonder from it.

Ricky Mason (24:51):

Yeah, man. I often tell parents we’re gonna set kids up to go pro no matter what,

Eric Cross (24:56):

And those skill sets transfer, whether they decide to go into coding or they decide to manage a bank, you’re still gonna be dealing with people. You’re still gonna be problem-solving. You’re still gonna have to come up with creative solutions to things. It sounds like through a program like this, they learn those skills early.

Ricky Mason (25:12):

Yes. And I think that one thing that parents don’t think about … We talk about all the STEM and we want smart kids, but we need those soft skills also within STEM. So those competitions, getting them involved in those communities with STEM students is really huge in presenting their ideas because oftentimes, you know, our STEM guys, we’re in a lab working and that’s where we love and that’s where we wanna be because we haven’t, you know, been prepared to talk and present our ideas. So I think that’s a huge part of what we have to teach our STEM students. And we do that by providing that community and those opportunities for them to, you know, do that.

Eric Cross (25:47):

Thinking about where you are now, looking back on your K-12 education, were there any teachers that stood out to you or that inspired you as I even just say that, can you think of a particular teacher or one or two?

Ricky Mason (26:00):

When I think about my teachers, my teachers really taught me to solve those tough problems and those subjects that you don’t kinda like <laugh>, cause I was always a great student, but my teachers helped me to focus on those subjects that I didn’t so much, you know, enjoy. So I enjoyed math and science, but English social studies, like why do I have to be here? I had two teachers during my high school career that really supported me in that regard, and helping me to be the best student all aroundfrom like I said, STEM to English and social studies, and making me realize that I have to be a well-rounded student if I’m gonna be truly successful. As far as engineering, man, I would say one guy, my teacher, Nick Bazar up at John Hopkins. During my master’s there, I had a really cool project. I got to do data forensics on a real live murder case. <Laugh> That was really inspiring because I’m like, wow, this is real life where my coding skills are being used in a jury trial <laugh>. And so that was a really cool experience to partner with my professor to kind of do that. I mean, that was just mind blowing that I got to help with that and that, I mean, he was using his programming skills to help solve a murder case.

Eric Cross (27:22):

What’s the best way for people to connect with you and follow your journey? And if a teacher’s interested and they’re listening to this and they’re hearing, okay, this metaverse coding thing sounds awesome, I want to get involved, I wanna know more, where can people go? What steps should they take to be able to get connected to you and what you’re doing?

Ricky Mason (27:40):

Yeah. So you can check us out at brainSTEMu.com, that’s brainSTEM, the letter “u” dot com and on all social medias, we’re BrainSTEMu or BrainSTEM University. Teachers, right now, we are doing our free course for teachers. So sign up at brainstemu.com. You can sign up for your class to get into a free metaverse experience, just so you can kind of check it out and get your class into the metaverse and see how your students like the metaverse, how you like teaching in the metaverse and convert one of your 2D lessons from Google classroom into a metaverse classroom. For me, I’m Ricky Mason, 5 0 2 on all social media platforms. So you can just type that in Ricky Mason502 and get with me there.

Eric Cross (28:28):

Nice. Well Ricky, I wanna thank you for sharing your story and creating BrainSTEM. And then for, I know you’re a man of tremendous talents and skills and accomplishments, and you’re focusing all that on not only being back in your community, but also creating something for younger versions of you and opening up opportunities that they might not otherwise have, as you said, folks are like, what is STEM? And that is exactly where we need those seeds planted. So thank you for doing that.

Ricky Mason (28:55):

Oh man, this is awesome. I appreciate you, man for hosting this podcast and providing this platform and sharing the message of, you know, educators and people in the space.

Eric Cross (29:07):

Thanks so much for joining me and Ricky today. Make sure to support Science Connections by subscribing wherever you listen to podcasts. And you could hear more from Ricky in our Facebook group, Science Connections the community, where you can check out all the exclusive content. Until next time.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Ricky Mason says about science

“We just have to get behind [students] and back them with the same enthusiasm that we back sports…because I longed for that community when I was in school.”

– Ricky Mason

CEO, BrainSTEM

Meet the guest

Ricky Mason is the dynamic CEO and founder of BrainSTEM, an ed-tech company that developed a metaverse for education. His corporate career included lead engineer roles at the DoD, NASA, and CIA. Ricky transitioned to education as adjunct faculty at the University of Kentucky. While there, he started BrainSTEM to bring innovative technology and an inspirational curriculum to STEM education. Today, BrainSTEM serves public school districts, private schools, and nonprofits.

Follow Ricky on all social media @rickymason502

Portrait of a smiling man with a beard and short hair, wearing a white shirt, against a gray background.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. Listen here!

S3-01: Science as the underdog, and the research behind it

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

Get ready for season 3 of Science Connections: The Podcast!

In our first episode, we unpack the research around our season theme of science as the underdog with Horizon Research, Inc. Vice President Eric R. Banilower and  Senior Researcher Courtney Plumley. Eric and Courtney dive into the research they’ve found and their experiences as former educators to show how science is often overlooked in K–12 classrooms. We discuss how the science classroom compares to other subjects in terms of time and resources, how schools are a reflection of society, and what’s needed to change science and its impact on a larger scale.

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Courtney Plumley (00:00):

We asked teachers how much science, professional development, they’ve had in the last three years, and nearly half of elementary teachers said none.

Eric Cross (00:10):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. I am super-excited to be kicking off the third season with the show. This entire season will be exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And we’re gonna make the case for science, by showing how and why it can be used more effectively. In the coming episodes, we’re gonna talk about how science can be better integrated into other content areas like literacy and math, and explore some of the benefits that you might not be thinking about good science instruction. But first, science as the underdog. I bet some of you out there feel like science is the underdog in your community at school. I know I have at times. To kick off this season, I’m gonna talk to two people who really studied this question by looking at the state of science instruction across the US. Eric Banilower is Vice President of Horizon Research and Courtney Plumley is Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. Eric was the principal investigator and Courtney an author of the latest in a series of studies called “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” We’re gonna dive into the findings of their most recent report to see what the data’s showing us. Please enjoy my discussion with Eric Banilower and Courtney Plumley. Courtney, hello. And thank you so much for joining us.

Courtney Plumley (01:25):

Hi Eric. It’s nice to be here.

Eric Cross (01:26):

And Eric, welcome.

Eric R. Banilower (01:27):

We’re thrilled to be here, so thank you for having us.

Eric Cross (01:30):

I was reading through the report. Four hundred…a very thorough report, 471 pages, I think, as I got it?

Eric R. Banilower (01:37):

And that’s only one of the many reports from that study.

Eric Cross (01:40):

Yeah. You all have done your work, so I’m really excited to to talk to you about this. And on this season of the show, we’re exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And I think a lot of our listeners, we feel like science is an underdog either in their school or in their district. But you’ve actually done some research on this, in a 2018 study, “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” So I wanna talk about this report. But first I was hoping you can kind of set the stage. How did you come to work on this report, and then, big picture, what were you hoping to find out?

Eric R. Banilower (02:10):

So the 2018 study that you just mentioned was actually the sixth iteration of a series of studies dating back to 1977. And we collect data every decade or so—you know, plus or minus a few years. And really, what we’re trying to do is get a snapshot of what the science and math education system looks like in in the nation. So my role grew. I started working at Horizon in about 1998, after teaching high school for five years in California. And then going to graduate school. And right about that time, the company was doing the 2000 iteration of the survey. And I worked on it with the team here at Horizon. And then we did it again in 2012. And I had a much more prominent role in that study, and became the kind of leader of the study. And in 2018, the most recent version, we just did it again. So the goal of this study is really to kind of examine key aspects of the K–12 STEM education system. And the main audience of the work has traditionally been policy makers, researchers, and practitioners who work at the federal, state, and district level.

Eric Cross (03:30):

So this study, you took kind of a sample size, but it’s reflective of trends that we tend to see across the nation as a whole. Would that be fair to say?

Eric R. Banilower (03:38):

Yes, definitely it is. It is a random sample of schools in the country. So we start with a list of all the public and private schools in the nation, and then do a random sample of those schools, and then work really, really hard to recruit schools to agree to be in the study. And that has gotten harder every time we’ve done the study, for many understandable reasons. And then once we have schools on board, we sample teachers within schools. So we don’t even survey every teacher in a school. It’s really a sub-sample. So that we can make inferences about the nation as a whole.

Eric Cross (04:14):

Makes sense. And so Courtney, what did you find out about the time spent on science instruction in US schools?

Courtney Plumley (04:22):

So, I’m gonna talk about elementary teachers to begin with.

Eric Cross (04:26):

Because that was your past life, right?

Courtney Plumley (04:28):

I am a former elementary teacher, yeah. So that’s kind of where my head is. And that’s relatable for me. Right? So we asked teachers, like, how many days of the week or weeks of the year that they teach elementary school. And fewer than 20% teach science every day of the school year. They kind of do one or two things, for the most part. They teach a couple days a week or they teach every day of the week, but only for, like, maybe six weeks, and then they swap with social studies and they kind of do that across the school year. Which is really different from, like, math, right? We also asked elementary teachers, how often do they teach math, and it’s every day of the year. Then we also asked them how many minutes they teach when they’re teaching, and we kind of did the math to figure out, all right, if they taught science every day of the school year, how many minutes would it be in a single day, so that we could make a more comparable comparison with math and ELA. If you were to work it out, how many minutes of science an elementary teacher teaches across the year, and break it down to per day, it’s like 18 minutes for the lower elementary grades, 27 for the upper elementary grades. Which is not a lot. But it’s pretty much an hour a day in math, and 80 plus minutes in ELA. So, a lot less. And then, you know, when I was teaching, the first thing to go was always science, right? If there was an assembly, if there was early release or whatever, that was the first thing to go. So those numbers might even be higher. Just because they aren’t factoring that kind of thing in, too.

Eric Cross (06:05):

So, now I’m curious. That is something that I’ve seen just anecdotally, science being the first thing to go. I feel like I’ve seen that almost…it’s almost become a meme, that I’ve heard that so often. Just in your experience, why do you think that is that huge disparity between the two?

Courtney Plumley (06:26):

Well, I mean, when I was teaching, I was teaching third grade. I had an end-of-grade test in math and ELA for my kids. I didn’t have one in science. So the administration said, “Hey, if you’re gonna drop something, drop something that’s not tested.”

Eric Cross (06:41):

Simple as that. And Eric, you, past life: physics teacher. High school. What did you see? ‘Cause our listeners run the gamut from elementary all the way up to high school. What did you see, as far as relative science instruction in the secondary level?

Eric R. Banilower (07:00):

Sure. You know, secondary is just a whole different situation than elementary. Rght? Because you have departmentalization. I taught science. I didn’t have to teach other subjects. And students had periods, and they still do, sorry, they still have periods, even though it’s been a long time since I taught. And you know, they rotate from one class to another. So all the classes were essentially the same length. So, you know, when I was teaching, it was about 50-minute periods. So in terms of minutes of a class or minutes on a subject, it’s not really different. But what is different is what students are required to take in order to graduate high school. One of the things we asked schools about in this study was how many years of a subject do students have to take in order to graduate? And what we saw was in mathematics, over half the schools in the nation require students to take four years of mathematics to graduate. OK? And the vast majority of the rest, about 44%, require three years in science. Most schools require three years. Very few require four years. And many, or a fair number, still only require two years to graduate. So the expectation of what students are taking is lower in science than it is in mathematics.

Eric Cross (08:20):

So you were seeing the same trend in secondary, essentially.

Eric R. Banilower (08:24):

Yes.

Eric Cross (08:24):

The amount of time devoted to the instruction of science…we’re kind of seeing it mirrored just across K–12 across the board.

Eric R. Banilower (08:33):

That’s correct.

Eric Cross (08:34):

And that’s across the country. ‘Cause the sample size represents teachers from Alaska, Hawaii, the South, SoCal, everywhere. So what’s been the reaction to that number? Like 18 to 20 minutes is…I mean, it’s, it’s half of my lunch at our school. What’s been the reaction to that number since this data has been published?

Eric R. Banilower (08:58):

I don’t know, Courtney, if you want to take that…

Courtney Plumley (09:00):

It’s a lot of what you just did. Like, what??? Like, how is it possible to teach all the things you need to teach in such a little amount of time?

Eric R. Banilower (09:08):

What’s really kind of surprising to me, though — though now that I’ve worked on three iterations of the study, it no longer surprises me, but it did at first — is that these numbers really aren’t changing since we’ve started doing this study. You know, people thought maybe with No Child Left Behind and the increase in accountability, time on science might actually go down, because there was more testing in math and English Language Arts. It didn’t happen. It was pretty much constant, that this has been kind of the state of science education for a long time.

Eric Cross (09:44):

So Eric, if I’m hearing you right: The past studies, we’re not seeing an increase or a decline. This has been this way for how many years, roughly, would you say? Since it’s been studied?

Eric R. Banilower (09:54):

You know, I’d have to go back to the 1977 report to get the numbers, but I’m gonna say since then, it has not changed much, if at all.

Eric Cross (10:03):

So this has kind of been entrenched. This has been the norm for almost for the career of a teacher, almost generationally. We’re looking at anyone who’s been in the highest levels of leadership to someone just entering the classroom, this has been the way it’s always been. This is kind of for many people what they’ve only known.

Eric R. Banilower (10:20):

Right.

Eric Cross (10:21):

Kind of become the norm.

Courtney Plumley (10:21):

We didn’t even have science when I was in elementary school. We had science on a cart that came by, you know, every other week.

Eric Cross (10:28):

Was that like a food truck, but like the science version of it? It shows up and does quick science and takes off?

Courtney Plumley (10:35):

And New York was, I mean — we always watched Voyage of the Mimi. I don’t know if you ever watched that. But that’s what we watched every single time the Science on the Cart came. So it’s like a marine biology show. Ben Affleck was on it when he was a kid.

Eric Cross (10:48):

<laugh> Really? For me it was, Mr. Wizard. For some of my students, even now, Bill Nye. You know, the Bill Nye show or something would come on. So what happens when you look at less wealthy districts? Is there a relationship between community resources and science instruction, or is it pretty much equal no matter what the district resources are, the school’s resources are? Did you see any data there?

Eric R. Banilower (11:12):

Yes. We actually did a lot of disaggregating the data by community type, student demographics in the schools, to look to see whether there were areas of inequities across the country. And, you know, one of the factors we looked at was kind of a measure of socioeconomic status. You know, wealth in the community. By looking at percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. And interestingly, in terms of time on science instruction, there is actually not a relationship between income level and how much time is spent at the elementary level on science, which actually surprised us.

Eric Cross (11:54):

Because you might have expected it to be the other way now. And granted, it’s 18 to 20 minutes, there isn’t much more to shave off off of that. But were there other differences, like when you compared those communities? Maybe it wasn’t the amount of science instruction, but was there anything else, like teacher preparedness, resources? Were there anything else that you did see discrepancies in? Or was it equal across the board?

Eric R. Banilower (12:13):

No, unfortunately there, there have been, and still are, a number of areas where community resources are related to pretty substantial differences in educational opportunities that students have. So, you know, we’re talking about the high school science requirements. One of the things that we saw was that high schools in less wealthy communities tend to offer less rigorous science courses than high schools in better-off-financially communities. So they may not be AP courses or second year advanced courses to the same extent that there are in the wealthier communities. That’s one big difference that we saw. Another one was what you were just saying about, sort of, the teachers who teach in these communities. You know, I think that for many years people have had a feeling that the best teachers go to the better off schools because it’s easier to teach there. Well, we see that the schools with the most poverty, they tend to have the newer teachers, who are just starting their career. They tend to have teachers who are less well prepared to teach their subject. And there’s a host of other differences we found. And you know, you mentioned the report being 400 pages. This other report that looks at these differences is also quite long, and, you know, identified a number of areas where there are these disparities in the system.

Eric Cross (13:43):

Well, we appreciate you synthesizing this for us, because this is super-important. And you’ve fleshed out a lot of things. And the fact that it’s driven by data, we as science teachers, we as scientists, being objective, really, really value that. Because this is actually validating a lot of the things that our listeners and myself, we experience anecdotally. But you don’t have a lot of things to network you. And sometimes, when you see this, you wonder if it’s just you, or is are other people experiencing this? And so as you start talking about this data, realizing, oh wow, this is not something in isolation. This is systemic. This is something that’s impacted. And then Eric, what you said about schools that were lower-income, that were under-resourced, and didn’t offer those advanced classes, what are some of the impacts of that, maybe downstream, of doing that? Not having those AP classes? I just kind of wanted to put that out there and ask you.

Eric R. Banilower (14:31):

You know, this is a really…this is a current debate right now, about what the goals of schooling K–12 should be. You know, are all kids meant to go to college? Should there be alternative paths? And you know, I know when I was teaching, I would have students say, “Why do I need to know this? I’m not gonna go into science. I’m not gonna study physics. Why do I need to take this?” And, you know, the answer I used to give them was, “You never know where your life is gonna end up and what opportunities you’ll have. And by having these educational experiences, you have more opportunities available to you. Whether or not you choose to go down those paths, you have opportunities. And when you don’t take this kind of coursework, you know, even if you don’t want to go to college, you limit your potential careers. Because so many careers nowadays require some technical knowledge, some knowledge of science, even if it’s not explicitly a science job. It is embedded in our society now. We are a technological and science-based society.”

Eric Cross (15:37):

It reminds me of something that I’ve told my students, that if you become a scientist, that’s awesome. I love that. But if you don’t, and you want to be a dancer or an actor or a lawyer or anything that may not be directly related to STEM, I want you to choose it because it was a choice, and not a lack of options. So as long as you’re choosing not to go in STEM, and you don’t make that decision because you can’t, or because you weren’t given the opportunity. So that’s how I’ve always had this mindset as a teacher. And I’ve explained it to my students. So if you say, “Cross, you know what I want to do, I wanna be an awesome chef,” which, you know, low-key that’s science, right? <laugh> Molecular gastronomy, we know that. But like, you be the best chef. But as long as you’re being a chef because you choose that, and you’re like, “I love science, but I don’t wanna go that direction,” we’re good.

Eric R. Banilower (16:26):

Right. And if you think about, a lot of social justice issues with pollution and climate change, and you look at which communities are more affected by some of these larger environmental problems and challenges, it tends to be the lower socioeconomic communities, the more poverty-stricken communities have worse water, have worse air quality. And so if, if people from these communities are going to make informed decisions about who they’re gonna vote for, about what policies they’re gonna support, those are science topics that you have to have some understanding in order to make informed decisions in your life.

Eric Cross (17:09):

Courtney, you were one of the Swiss Army Knife teachers. This is how I perceive it for elementary. You had to teach everything. And shout out to all of my elementary school teachers that have to be mathematicians and grammar whizzes and scientists and PE instructors and social emotional, all of those different things. you also looked at teacher preparedness. How did teachers feel about teaching science compared to other subjects like language arts and math? Did you see anything there?

Courtney Plumley (17:39):

We did, we did. And I’m glad you said, “How did they feel about it?” Because one thing that, you know, in a survey you can’t really do is capture how someone actually…how good someone actually…the quality of someone’s instruction. But you can ask them how prepared they feel. And you can even ask them like stats, like, “What did you major in in college?” You know. But you really are going on based on what what they say. So we ask them how prepared they feel to teach all the core subjects. And two-thirds of elementary teachers felt very well prepared to teach reading. They felt very well prepared to teach math. But when it comes to science, it’s less than a third felt very well prepared. And you know, like you said, when you’re teaching elementary school, you’re teaching all the subjects. But also in science, there’s usually four main instructional units in a school year. And they’re all from different science disciplines. So not only are you going on, like, “Maybe in college took a lot of bio classes, but I didn’t take any physics classes, and now I have to teach physics to my kids and I have no experience there.” So, you know, we also ask them how well-prepared they felt in these different disciplines. And the numbers are even smaller, you know. Fewer than a quarter felt very well-prepared in life science. And like 13% felt very well-prepared in physical science. So there’s definitely a big difference between how much teachers feel prepared for ELA and math versus science.

Eric Cross (19:08):

And just from a human perspective, when we don’t feel prepared for something, we’re not really gonna probably lean into it as much as we are into our strengths. Like, that’s just kind of how we are across the board.

Courtney Plumley (19:18):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (19:18):

I’m even like that with my own chores in the house. Or when I have things I need to get done, and I might not be as good at doing those things—it’s gonna be a heavy cognitive load; I’m gonna have to do some background research—I tend to find other areas to excel in. Like, I’m gonna be productive in this other area. I’m gonna really crush it here. But this other thing gets put to the back burner.

Courtney Plumley (19:36):

Totally. And the same reason I might skip science today, <laugh> ’cause it’s scary.

Eric Cross (19:41):

Yeah, exactly. But I love this book. <Laugh> Or we could do this math, and let’s really, really dive deep into it. Now, did you also look at professional development and instructional resources that are being provided?

Courtney Plumley (19:53):

We did.

Eric Cross (19:54):

And on the whole, how was the amount—and I’m seeing a trend here, so I’m kind of feeling like I know where this might go—but I wanted to ask it, did the amount of professional development and resources for science, was there much of a difference between that and other subjects?

Eric R. Banilower (20:10):

Well, I’ll start on this, and Courtney, feel free to jump in. You know, one of the things that we asked was how much kind of discretionary funding do schools devote to science and how much to mathematics? So, for consumables or equipment and supplies or computer software for teachers to use in the classroom. And it’s hard to compare, I think, across subjects because the demands for this kind of supplies, et cetera, is very different, I think, in science than it is in mathematics. Right? We have a lot of, you know, equipment for doing investigations, consumable supplies in science. And those things need to be replenished on a regular basis. It turns out, when we look at the data for school discretionary spending on this kind of stuff, the median school spends less than $2 per student at the elementary level on science, compared to over $6 for mathematics. At the high school level, it’s kind of reversed. Schools spend more money on high school science than they do on high school math. but even still, at the high school, it’s less than $7 per student. Which is not a lot of money being devoted to thinking about all the materials, supplies, chemicals, et cetera, that you need to teach science well, at the high school level. More disturbing is the fact that, you know, we were talking about inequities before, schools that serve less well-off communities spend less than schools that serve wealthier communities, by quite a big amount.

Eric Cross (21:46):

So essentially the per-student thing just kind of popped out to me: So, like, an expensive Starbucks drink is what we’re spending on science per student.

Eric R. Banilower (21:57):

At the high school level. Yes.

Eric Cross (21:58):

At the high school level. And I get those catalogs in the mail, from all of those big science companies. You can’t get much for seven bucks. At least, nothing high-level. And I know I do a lot of 99-cent store science. I go down the street, go to the 99-cent store. Thankfully we could do a lot of awesome science with just, you know, cheap things. But a lot of the higher level experiences, they’re pricey. But the experiences are so rich! And $7 at the high school level is nothing. It’s not much at all.

Eric R. Banilower (22:28):

Yeah. It is definitely, you know, kind of shocking to think about what we’re investing in our children’s future.

Eric Cross (22:37):

Now, just to put you both on the spot, ’cause I feel like that we’ve identified some…we’re seeing a trend here, we’re seeing a pattern. We’re talking about, you know, being science teachers. There’s a pattern going on here. Do you think it’s fair to characterize science as the underdog?

Courtney Plumley (22:52):

I think in elementary school, it is a fair statement. Because, like we said before, I mean they’re gonna preference math and ELA almost all the time. I mean, the other thing you’d asked a little bit ago was about professional development, too. And we do have some data on that. And we ask teachers, you know, how much science professional development they’ve had in the last three years. And nearly half of elementary teachers said none. And I know I didn’t have any science professional development. If I was gonna pick from among the catalog, I was picking one that I needed more, like math. Math and ELA. I keep making that statement, but just over and over, it’s the truth.

Eric Cross (23:31):

And going back to what you said earlier, because that’s where the accountability was, right? And that kind of came top-down.

Courtney Plumley (23:38):

Yes.

Eric Cross (23:38):

And influenced everything else.

Eric R. Banilower (23:40):

Yeah. Now, really interesting thing that we did, a year or so ago, ’cause someone asked us, you know, “Hey, could you look at this?” is we compared elementary science instructional time among states where science counted towards accountability versus states where science doesn’t count towards accountability. And at the upper elementary grades, more time was spent on science in schools in states where they had science accountability. Now I’m not arguing for adding science to accountability systems. But that’s a pretty telling piece of data.

Eric Cross (24:19):

What gets measured gets done.

Eric R. Banilower (24:20):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (24:20):

Or what was getting evaluated was getting done. And that raises, that opens up a myriad of other questions about testing, and what that reveals, and all of those different things. But at the end of the day, what you’re finding is that the things that were getting tested were the things that were getting the priority.

Eric R. Banilower (24:36):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (24:37):

How did we get to this point? And Eric, you said it goes back at least to ’77, but we look at society and we’re…I wanna say we’re post-pandemic, but we’re we’re not. but we’re trying to, we’re trying to get past that. But we’re looking at…we had innovations in biology, we have innovations right now in green energy and electric cars and all of these things that are STEM-based. We know that these are things that have moved humanity forward. And we look at the pipeline of people who are in STEM and we, we see the disparities and things like that. Why was science given less of a priority? I’m just curious. Maybe, Courtney, we could start with you, if you have any ideas. Or Eric. Either one. But how did we get here?

Eric R. Banilower (25:22):

<laugh> I think Courtney wants me to take that one. I’m older so I’ve seen more <laugh>. So, you know, I have the gray hair. She doesn’t. I think it’s complicated. And I know this sounds cliche, but but schools are a reflection of society, right? And, and so science education, you know, if you think back when Sputnik was launched, there became this great demand in America to improve and produce more scientists and engineers in response to this Cold War threat. Right? And then in the ’80s there was rising, oh, the gathering storm was an economic argument that we needed to increase science and math, you know, education and people going into those fields in order to compete economically against the global competitors. And I think that America has always produced a fair number, a large number, of high-quality scientists and engineers, you know. And we still lead the world in many ways. But where we’ve identified as a problem is who has those opportunities to go into those fields. You know, it used to be a very select, a very male-dominated, white male-dominated field. Right? And other people didn’t have the opportunity, or they were shown the way out pretty early. And we, I think, have come to realize as a country that, you know, the, the greater the diversity of thought that we can get into these discussions, the more innovative we can be and the more productive as a society we can be. And so I think we’ve had this shift in the country to, instead of thinking about just the quality for the select few, but to be thinking about the quality for everyone. And so that makes it seem like some of these challenges are greater than they used to be. And I think they’re different challenges, right? We’ve evolved as a society and I think schools have evolved.

Eric Cross (27:40):

There is a conversation I was in on a plane with a person who was a materials manager for a company that made the adhesive for sandpaper. And we were flying…I was flying to Denmark and he was flying to some other Scandinavian country. And we were just talking about it. And he came from another industry, and somehow the conversation led to science. I don’t know how that happened. But somehow I just started talking about science and I asked him about, Eric, kind of what you said about the US kind of leading the way in science innovation versus the rest of the world. And I asked him why. And he said one of the reasons why is because the heterogeneous thought. The different groups of people that are coming to a problem actually create more innovative and novel solutions. Versus when it’s more homogeneous. And everyone’s either culturally or just for whatever reason, kind of thinks a certain way. While they might have a more efficient way, the variety of solutions are not as varied and not as novel. I was reminded of that story based on what you just said. So it’s really interesting. So it seems to be that it benefits if we have more heterogeneous groups, more folks who are contributing to STEM, because that’s gonna be solving the next problem more efficiently. Or I guess maybe in my head it seems like the next we need…we do really well when we have a dragon to slay. I mean, it seems like we come together when that’s the case, right? Like, I dunno.

Eric R. Banilower (29:06):

No, I think that’s…I think that’s accurate.

Eric Cross (29:09):

Later on the season of the podcast, we’re gonna explore ways to better integrate science with other subjects like literacy and math. Were you able to study at all any more integrated approaches to science instruction? Does any of your research support that approach?

Courtney Plumley (29:25):

Not on the national survey, we didn’t study that. And it’s something that we’ve talked about before, because it’s difficult to get teachers to…we were talking about instructional time. It’s hard for teachers to put a number on it when they’re integrating, because, you know, it’s not like I have my science block from 3 to 3:30 anymore. Now it’s kind of scattered about. But it’s something that has been in the ether. We’ve been looking at it in a couple of projects. So there’s some evidence that it can be effective, especially for getting more, you know…the idea is you can get more time for science if you are integrating with other subjects. But one thing to kind of caution is like, students need to have opportunities to learn each discipline when they’re doing integrated instruction. So you don’t wanna just have, like, math in your science. Kids already know to just, like, support it. Then it’s hard to take time from math to put it into science when they’re not actually learning anything new. That’s the easy thing to do, though, is say, “Oh, my kids already know how to measure. We did that in a previous unit. So now we’ll we’ll do it as part of our science instruction.” So it’s a lot of work to make it so they’re learning something new, mathematics and science, at the same time. And it’s not really something that we think that teachers should be having to do on their own, with all the other things that teachers have to do. The last thing they need to do is be creating their own, you know, curriculum. Something that’s already…you know, it’s not straightforward. So we’ve been talking about it, we think it’s really something that instructional materials maybe need to be focusing on instead of teachers having to do that on their own,

Eric Cross (31:01):

Teachers would implement it, but asking them to create it is a whole different thing, and it’s a huge ask.

Courtney Plumley (31:08):

Yes.

Eric Cross (31:08):

Yeah. And, did I hear you right? So the ideal situation would’ve been the students learning a newer math concept, but embedded in a science kind of context? Or was that the better way? Versus, “I’m gonna take a math concept they already know and then just put it into the science setting?”

Courtney Plumley (31:26):

Well, if the idea is that you can get more science time if you’re, you know, integrating things, so you can maybe take time away from a specific math block by putting it with science, or whatever, then if the math is something that the kids already know, now you’re just taking away. I think that that has to be new in both cases, in order to justify having more time.

Eric Cross (31:49):

Right. Eric, in the secondary level, any thoughts on that? On integrating these disciplines together?

Eric R. Banilower (31:56):

I think, you know, just like at the elementary level, it can be challenging to do it well. When I taught, I taught my last couple years in a kind of school-within-a-school kind of situation, where our goal was to try to integrate science, mathematics, and language arts. And it’s hard to do that in a meaningful way. And we did not have curriculum materials given to us to help us do this. We were trying to figure out how to do this on our own, while we were teaching 200 kids a day in our subjects. Right? And five preparations. And you know, it’s a big ask of any teacher. And there are teachers who thrive on this and are great at this. And, you know, that’s one thing I wanna, make clear: our data is about the system, and we are former teachers. Almost everyone who works at Horizon is a former teacher. We have the greatest respect for teachers and what they do. And what our data is showing is are kind of like areas where the system isn’t providing teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things. I think at the high school level, there has been this idea of project-based learning where students are bringing together different skills, different ideas from across disciplines. And I think there’s, again, a lot of potential in doing that. But trying to develop those experiences so that they are doing service to the different subjects, so students are learning what they’re supposed to learn in English Language Arts, that they’re learning, important mathematics, and that this is in a science context, where they are getting to do and understand what science is and how science, as a discipline, operates…that’s just a really hard thing to develop.

Eric Cross (33:53):

So what I’m hearing—and I really appreciate the nuance in this, because it’s not a simple “Yes. Integrated is better,”—I’m hearing “Yes. Quality control.” “Yes. It needs to be written not by teachers; they’re the practitioners.” It’s “Yes. And,” not just simply binary. Which…it’s so easy to wanna chunk things and say yes or no on things. But this one seems a much more nuanced approach. And in a future episode, you mentioned project-based learning, we’re gonna try and talk to people who have thoughts on this. And I really appreciate that you talked about project-based learning, because also, how do you evaluate that? How do you evaluate whether or not it is high quality? Is this is something I see? You know, high-quality standards, highest quality science teaching, highly qualified teachers. It’s something that I see often. Now, based on all your research, this is kind of the 30,000-foot view. What advice might you have for people who are thinking about changing the way science is taught in this country? Which hasn’t changed since 1977, at least since we’ve been measuring it. Any advice for people who do want to act? Another way to ask, it might be, if you were given a magic wand, <laugh>, you have all power, what might you do if you can control the entire vertical system?

Eric R. Banilower (35:07):

Yeah, so a clarification, I do think science instruction has changed. It has evolved. I think there’s a lot of really good things going on in different pockets of the country. One of the challenges is bringing those good ideas and good practices to scale. Right? There are approximately 1.2 million teachers of science K–12 in this country. That’s a lot of people. And about 80% of those are elementary teachers who are responsible for teaching other subjects as well. So my thinking is often about, “How do we take what we know and that we’ve learned through decades of research is effective, and impact a large number of teachers, and therefore a large number of students?” And you know, Courtney I think has hinted at this already. And you’ve mentioned it too, Eric, is that teaching is a profession, right? And it’s a craft. But in no other profession do practitioners have the expectation that they’re developing their own tools and methods for their work. I know when I was in my teacher preparation program, and it’s still extremely common, one of the assignments perspective teachers are given is to develop a unit and develop a lesson, right? You don’t have doctors being asked to develop new treatments and new tests to use. Their job is to get to know their patient, assess what’s going on, and then using research-based methods to develop a plan of action, right? And I think that analogy works really well in education and is a way that we could have a scalable approach for kind of raising the floor across the country for the quality of science education. Giving teachers research-based materials, high-quality instructional materials, that they can then use and adapt to meet the needs of their students, would allow them to focus on getting to know their students, seeing what their strengths are, seeing where they have room for growth, and using the materials they’re given to help those students progress. And I think that is definitely a way where we could have a big impact at a large scale.

Eric Cross (37:39):

Courtney, same question: Magic wand, all power. You can change systems from the elementary perspective. What would you do? I’m assuming part of it’s gonna be changing that 18 to 20 minute time. But even for that to happen, what would you do? What would you change?

Courtney Plumley (37:57):

Well, I don’t know. Like, for it to change, I don’t know the answer to that. But yes, increasing the time would be great. And like Eric was saying, giving teachers— ’cause again, I’m coming in, not enough probably background in science—and then, you know, when I was, when I was teaching, we had one set of textbooks for the entire grade. Six classes, right? Like, share them. But third graders aren’t gonna read textbooks anyway, right? So instead I’m going to the teacher store. I’m pulling things off the shelf. And like, “OK, yeah, sure, I’ll use this.” And nowadays, teachers are going to Teachers Pay Teachers or whatever. Because I didn’t have anything good to use. So like Eric is saying, if I had instructional materials that were good instructional materials that were gonna teach my kids, that they were gonna be engaged, that they weren’t sitting and listening to science, but they were doing science, you know, and I had professional development to actually help me do it? That’s what I think we need to have. And I mean, I know there are some people out there that are working on that, but it’s not a lot. I mean, if you look at Ed Reports, they rate how well-aligned science curriculum are to standards. And there are two right now that have Ed Reports green lights. There’s Amplify and there’s OpenSciEd. You know, so there’s not much out there for teachers to use. And, so it’s hard. It’s hard. Where am I gonna go and get this stuff if it doesn’t exist? And so I’m making it up by myself. Which we already said is not the best use of teachers’ time, when they’ve got so many other demands on their time.

Eric Cross (39:27):

Eric and Courtney, listening to both of your responses, it created a visual in my mind. And Eric, I loved your analogy of…I started thinking of a chef, a welder, and a farmer. And I thought about the chef saying like, “You’re a great chef! Now, can you go farm, and make your own food, so that you can cook it?” Or the welder who has to make his own welding tools and go smelting. You know, making the different rods. I’m not a welder. But you know, all those different parts. Or the farmer who has to build his own tractor and innovate all that stuff. You’re absolutely right, the way you articulated that. And then Courtney, you essentially said, “Give them the tools and then teach them how to use it so they can go and actually be effective with it, because you’re in front of kids doing so many different things.” There’s only so much time in the day, and teachers want to do these things; they want to, but you end up having to triage when you’re asked to. Going back to Eric’s analogy, if you’re in the ER, but you’re also creating the vaccines and you’re also doing the research on which types of vaccines are gonna be the most effective, that’s, that’s a lot to ask. And so, I appreciate both your responses on that. Now, last question, what are you both working on now? This report came out in 2018. What’s, what’s next on the horizon? Actually literally, that’s no pun intended. <laugh> What’s next? <laugh> What’s next for, for you both? What are you working on?

Eric R. Banilower (40:42):

Well, you know, we would love to do another national survey, in a few years. We have to get funding to do it. And you know, that’s always something that takes effort and isn’t a guarantee. We’ve written grants to do these studies in the past, and there’s also the dealing with the reality of the situation. I think a lot of schools, still coming off the tail end of dealing with Covid, are overwhelmed. And we’ve had a hard time, I mentioned before, recruiting schools, and it gets harder every time, just ’cause they have so much on their plate. And I couldn’t see going to a school now and saying, “Hey, one more thing. Do you mind?” So I think we have to kind of wait a little bit for things to settle down before we can do another one of these studies. It just doesn’t seem feasible right now. But we’d love to in the not-too-distant future. Other than that, Courtney and I actually work on some projects together and some projects not together. One of the things that we’re working on together is a study of a fifth grade science curriculum that was developed by Okhee Lee at NYU and her colleagues, that is both aligned with the NGSS and purposely designed to support multilingual learners in developing both their science knowledge and skills as well as their language skills. And we’ve been working with the crew at NYU to study this curriculum and try to figure out, how well it’s working and under what circumstances. So that’s been a really interesting project that’s going on right now.

Courtney Plumley (42:26):

I recently worked on a report with the Carnegie Corporation in New York that actually I think, compliments what we’ve been talking about a lot. It’s about the status of K–12 education in the US—or science education in the US! <Laugh>—and so as part of that report we interviewed like 50 science education experts across the country. We surveyed teachers, people in the university settings, researchers, and everything to kind of get a little bit more update of the state of science education right now. And so a lot of the things we’ve been talking about, we still are talking about with the people in this report four years later. So, work in progress. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (43:09):

And again, going back to 1977, based on what Eric was saying earlier, we’re looking at these large systems, these systemic changes don’t happen overnight.

Eric R. Banilower (43:20):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (43:21):

It’s very slow-moving.

Eric R. Banilower (43:22):

That’s right. I would say there is progress. I think we’ve learned a lot. We are getting better. Are we there yet? No, we’re not happy with where we are. But I think, you know, I think it’s important to be hopeful about the direction things are going in.

Eric Cross (43:37):

Well-said. I agree. Courtney. Eric, thank you so much for unpacking that report that speaks to, that validates what so many teachers across the country are experiencing. And thank you for your advocacy for high-quality science education and your passion for supporting teachers and being that voice from a data-driven perspective of what teachers experience and then advocating for solutions for them. It’s super-encouraging for me, and I know it’s gonna be really encouraging for a lot of our listeners. So thank you.

Eric R. Banilower (44:10):

Thank you for having us.

Courtney Plumley (44:12):

Yeah. Thank you, Eric.

Eric Cross (44:15):

Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Eric Banilower, Vice President of Horizon Research, and Courtney Plumley, Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. For much more, check out the show notes for a link to the 2018 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. And please remember to subscribe to Science Connections wherever you get podcasts, so that you’re not missing any of the upcoming episodes in Season three. Next time on the show, we’re gonna start laying out the road map for using science more effectively. And we’ll start by looking at the how and the why of integrating literacy instruction.

Susan Gomez Zwiep (44:49):

When we look at Science First and build language development around it, the experience tends to be more authentic and organic.

Eric Cross (44:58):

That’s next time on Science Connections: The Podcast. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Eric R. Banilower says about science

“Our data is showing us places where the system needs to provide teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things.”

– Eric R. Banilower

Vice President of Horizon Research, Inc.

Meet the guests

Eric R. Banilower is a Vice President at Horizon Research, Inc. (HRI), and has worked in education for over 30 years. Eric was previously a high school physics and physical science teacher before he joined HRI in 1997, where he has worked on a number of research and evaluation projects. Most recently, he has been the Principal Investigator of the 2012 and 2018 iterations of the National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education, a nationally representative survey focusing on the status of the K–12 STEM education system.

A middle-aged man with light hair, glasses, and a short beard is smiling, wearing a plaid shirt. The photo has a circular frame with a star and decorative lines.

Courtney Plumley is a Senior Researcher at Horizon Research, Inc. She began her career in education as an elementary school teacher before starting at HRI in 2009. In her time at HRI she has worked on many K-12 STEM research and evaluation projects. Most recently, Ms. Plumley has worked with Carnegie Corporation of New York on mapping the landscape of K-12 science education in the US and is managing the field test for the OpenSciEd elementary materials.

A woman with wavy brown hair and a red top smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with a star and accent lines.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

S5.E6. Why skepticism is essential to the Science of Reading, with Dr. Claude Goldenberg

To view this protected page, enter the password below:



S2-01: How teachers are really feeling this school year

science connections S02-01 Episode Cover

In this special solo episode, Eric Cross starts the season by sharing his personal journey as an educator, and how the difficulties of the last few years have shaped his mindset going into the upcoming school year. Eric also addresses teacher burnout and what inspires him to continue working as a classroom educator. Explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page.

Download Transcript

Eric Cross (00:02):

Welcome to Science Connection, Season Two. As we begin the next season, I thought it would be a good time to share my story. As the host, I get to ask people questions about their journey, but I’ve actually never shared much about my own. So I’ve taken some of my most frequently asked questions to guests and asked them to myself. I hope you enjoy.

Eric Cross (00:23):

So the origin story question, I think really gets to the heart of why a person does what they do, because so much of who we are, especially as adults and teachers, is a result of experiences that we had in our lives when we were kids or in school with other teachers. And my life’s no different. I was born to a 19-year-old single mom. And when you’re a young boy growing up, especially with a young single mom, you often look to older men in different positions as kinda like a surrogate or like a mentor. And you may not even tell them that they are that to you. You kind of keep it close to the chest. And that’s what I did growing up. One of the ones that really stood out to me is, in seventh grade, I went to a middle school here in San Diego that was called Keiller Middle School. And we were a magnet program that specialized in science. And they had this program that brought professors from the local universities and they did this high-level enrichment. They would even take us to the college campus and we would work in these labs as seventh graders. It was amazing. And one of the people there, his name was Dr. Tress, and he was a professor. And Dr. Tress took a liking to me. I reminded him of his son. We were doing this great embryology experiment. We would take purple sea urchins. And we would inject them with potassium chloride, which would cause them to spawn. And we would fertilize these eggs, and then we would run different experiments using them. And these were things that I had never done before. I had always loved science. I’d always loved tinkering and building things. But this was my introduction, really, to high-level biology and to higher levels of education. I didn’t—I didn’t have many figures like that in my life growing up. I mean, I’m a first-generation, you know, high school, college graduate. Many of these are first generations for me. So, this was a new experience. And so Dr. Tress really unlocked a core memory and was one of my first mentors, as far as academics are concerned. And during my seventh-grade year, I entered the science fair and won first place, which was a huge deal. They took us out to Balboa Park. We got to miss school for a week. We got to go to all the museums for free. It was the best. And I think at that point in time, it really solidified something in me that would lay dormant until later on in my adult life. High school, I was really fortunate: the high school I went to was Morse High School, not too far from Keiller, and they had an aeronautics program. So I was able to enroll in that aeronautics program. And I learned how to fly before I learned how to drive. And I had this great instructor named Mr. Klon, who was this like 6′ 4″, 250-pound hippie guy. And he—we would get in the plane and we would have these like philosophical conversations. And through that, especially looking back now as a teacher, I realized that he was making connections with me and investing into who I was as a person. And it was something that I so needed at the time. Because at home I didn’t have that. You know, my safe place, a lot of time, was school. It was my only structure. It was where I knew I would get encouragement. It was where I knew things were reliable and consistent. For a lot of people, and a lot of kids, their home life isn’t like that. School was that for me. So Mr. Klon, I mean, he was this authentic, you know, consistent person in my life and made a huge difference at this time.

Eric Cross (03:23):

After I graduated high school, I left home just to get away from a difficult environment. And I was homeless for a little while and that was a huge moment in my life. And around that time, an aunt found out and she said, “You’re gonna come stay with us.” And this was like this three-year process of me living with them in this, like, functional family that ate dinner together. And they went to the zoo. They had family passes. And they took family photos at Christmastime. This was all weird stuff. Like, I didn’t know—I didn’t know who did these things. It was—I felt like a puppy that like lived in a home that was like…it was a home that was just always kind of like violent or like just really toxic. And then it gets put into a healthy home and doesn’t know how to act. That’s how it felt. And this was around like 19, 20 years old. During that time I started putting myself through school. So I went to community college and I was broke as a joke. And so I couldn’t afford the textbooks while I was going. So I would just go to the bookstore, the Barnes and Noble bookstore in Mira Mesa here in San Diego. And I would stay there all night using the textbooks or using the books there for doing my work. And then I would just put the books back on the shelves. Because let’s just face it. Textbooks are expensive, brother wasn’t trying to pay for all that. So I really had to earn that time. So I was working full-time. I was going to school. And, eventually I got a job in working in finance with a really great friend who mentored me during my younger twenties. And I didn’t wanna be broke and finance made sense.

Eric Cross (04:44):

And so I did that for a little while, until I got to a point in my career where I was watching an episode of The Office, the UK version, the Ricky Gervais version, and a character said, “I’d rather be at the bottom of a ladder I want to climb than halfway up one I don’t.” And I realized, working in finance, that I was halfway up a ladder I never wanted to climb. So I wanted to move into something that, if I was gonna spend eight hours a day or 10 hours a day doing something, I wanted it to be something that actually filled me up inside. And this is how I got into teaching. So I had always been working with young people, specifically 12- to 18-year-olds, like a non-profit or volunteering, mentoring, after-school programs. And I’ve always managed to rationalize my job in the finance world as meaningful because it let me do the real work that fulfilled me. So the real work was working with the kids. But my day job, my, like, Clark Kent-type job, was just, you know, doing the finance thing of like helping people that have a lot of money make more money. Which at the end of my life, I look back and I said, “That’s not what I want my legacy to be.”

Eric Cross (05:43):

And when the finance crash happened in 2008, that’s when I think I started looking back on it and said, “If I’m gonna spend all my time doing something and spending 40 or 60 or 80 hours of my day of my week doing things, I want it to matter. And that’s when I decided to pivot and leave that field and go and get my master’s in education and get my teaching credential, teaching science specifically. Now, one of the questions we get asked a lot and I’ve been asked is, is “How has teaching changed as a result of the pandemic?” And I feel like this could be several podcasts in and of itself, and it’s also regional, because everybody’s experienced it differently, And we’re still experiencing it! That’s the crazy thing! It’s like, it’s not over, we’re still in it. And some places have innovated and pivoted and some places just did what they needed to and they are trying to go back to business as usual. But if anything has happened, the pandemic revealed how much more, how much schools are more than places of just content learning. For many students it’s where they have their only community, their structure, their emotional wellness. They get regular meals, access to tech, and adults that care about them that are outside of their family. The schools are so much more than that. I mean, my school, they were a place, like a hub, that was giving out food every single day during the pandemic to families that would kind of drive by. So for a lot of schools, they became places like that. It also…the pandemic revealed the intensity of the educator workload. I mean, being able to manage your family, having the capacity, to be a content expert, you need to be a counselor, a trauma-care specialist, a coach, an encourager, a tech expert.

Eric Cross (07:23):

I mean, the term mental health is now more common and starting to become prioritized. Now we’re focusing so much more on the whole child. And we know from research that how a child feels about themselves and their safety and their security impacts their ability to learn. So the more comfortable and safe a student feels in the classroom with teachers and with friends, the better they’re gonna be able to learn. And ultimately the higher they’re gonna be able to achieve. You can’t, you can’t have one without the other. In addition, I think less teachers, see themselves teaching into retirement. I think that’s a big thing. I read these articles about teacher shortages and I think the reality is it’s actually teacher exodus. It’s teachers leaving. And that’s been really difficult. I’ve had many friends who’ve left for the private sector. And I get it, especially if you’re one that has—if you’re the first in your family to graduate from college, with a STEM degree, to them taking a teaching position can mean walking away from a salary in the private sector that pays two or three times more.

Eric Cross (08:23):

And in many places around the country, in order to be a teacher and maintain a median standard of living, you need either dual income, multiple jobs, or a multi-generational household. For a lot of people it just doesn’t make sense. And even right now, today, as I’m recording this, I’m reading articles and getting text messages…and I received a text message three days ago from a teacher that said, “My goal this year is to just not resign.” And that’s where a lot of teachers are feeling right now: isolated, challenged, and under-appreciated. And Plato said, “What’s honored in a country is cultivated there.” And I’ve been looking at how teachers are honored and one of the ways is just, like, practical. Like, look, I gotta pay my bills. You know, love the Starbucks gift card. Love the CPK, the gift card. The cards, all those other things…but brother got a car payment. And at the end of the day, if we care about our kids, we need to take care of the people that take care of them. And there’s very practical ways for that to happen. And everybody in different sectors around the country is dealing with that in different ways. I think the pandemic also revealed, now the public can see how our kids don’t receive the same quality of education. And once you’re aware of that, you can’t put the genie back in the bottle. So once you see on Zoom or once you see in a meeting, or once you see on the news, that students in different areas, whether it’s the rural South or a suburb in Seattle, are not getting equitable educations, well, ultimately that impacts all of us. Now. It’s not all doom and gloom. Good things have come from, as a result of, the pandemic. Many schools have made progress towards narrowing the technology gap, ’cause they had to! ‘Cause you can’t do Zoom and you can’t do Google Meet and all that stuff with a packet! You gotta get those Chromebooks. And Chromebooks and the internet and access to tech is not a new thing. It’s been out for a long time. The technology gap is not a new thing. It’s been written about extensively, but all of a sudden districts and schools started figuring out how to close that gap. And that’s awesome. We didn’t want a pandemic to be the catalyst for that to happen. But at the end of the day, we started closing it. A lot of schools did an amazing job and districts did an amazing job with deploying the hardware, sending out buses with wifi, putting lessons and videos on USB sticks and dropping them off to parents who live in sparsely populated areas. I mean, there were so many stories that I’ve heard about schools and teachers just doing amazing things, going above and beyond what they needed to on behalf of kids.

Eric Cross (10:51):

I think in addition to that, there’s also been students and families are now having more options to personalize their learning. So we have this in-person model, we have this Zoom or kind of online model, and this hybrid model, and it hasn’t all been perfect, you know, at all. But some families have come out and said, you know what actually doing this hybrid model is better for my son or better for my daughter or better for my student, because they’re able to get the socialization, but also able to focus better at home than they are in a classroom of 36. And that’s legitimate. You know, we talk about personalized learning, but it’s not exactly personalized when everybody has to wake up at the same time, same schedule, go to the same, the same classroom of, you know, up to 40 kids, and do the same lesson. I mean, we have to be honest about our limitations with personalizing learning for students. And when we can provide more options and we give teachers the infrastructure to be able to use different platforms, then we’re able to personalize learning a lot more.

Eric Cross (11:51):

There’s also been an emphasis on the whole-child wellness. I think the spotlight on mental well-being heavily impacts their academic success, but counseling teams, social workers, school psychologists—I think more than ever we’ve realized the value that they bring to the schools. And unfortunately many of them have caseloads of 200 students or more. And they’re seeing students most often that are in crisis. And especially after the pandemic, we’re realizing how valuable they are and how much we need to, one, honor them and give them the support that they need, and also recruit more. Because as we start recognizing how our brains are impacted by the things that we’re dealing with, we’re also gonna see how that’s gonna impact our students’ performance. And we need the specialists in those positions to be able to support our kids. I think, last, I think more innovation and lesson design and how we assess students. And so we’ve been talking about in education just kind of critiquing: how do we assess what a student knows? How do we make what a student actually does at school relevant to real life? I mean, so many times I have students who’ve graduated that are like, “I feel like the things I learned in school, like, they’re not always transferable to real life. It helped me on a test, but like, I don’t know how to do my taxes.” Or “I memorized these facts, but I don’t really apply it in my job.” Or “The facts that I learned I could have actually learned on the fly in my job. I wish I would’ve actually focused on the skills or had an earlier opportunity to get some experience because when I’m trying to apply for a job, <laugh> they ask for experience and I’m 22 years old.”

Eric Cross (13:28):

And so all these things kind of come up. And so I think there’s been some great conversations around “how do we rethink what education looks like?” And there’s different pockets around the country that have been doing that, I think, really well. And I think it’s important for us as teachers to stay connected to those people who are kind of pushing the boundaries and thinking outside the box, because when we get siloed, it’s really easy to get calcified and cynical. I get it. And it impacts me too. But when we’re around those people who have those fresh ideas, who are really pushing the limits, it inspires us. And that’s something I think during the pandemic that I’m grateful that I was intentional about, is staying connected with other teachers. There’s a big question; Why do you continue your work in the classroom and what keeps you motivated? And I was thinking really hard about this question, because depending on <laugh>, depending on my day, I feel like my answer’s gonna be a little bit different. So I’ve had to step back from this 30-foot, thousand-foot perspective and answer the question. And my answer is this: I think because I still feel like I can be effective to influence positive change in my classroom with my students and within the larger education system as a whole. I think if I lost either of those two, then I’d rethink my profession. Look, I’m an innovator. I like asking “why” questions and things like that. And I’m not always the most popular person when you do that. But education is like just a huge ship. It doesn’t pivot on a dime. And asking why questions and pushing for change on behalf of kids isn’t easy, fun, or glamorous, but it’s it’s necessary. And I feel like over the last few years, I’ve been able to see these kind of glimmers of a trajectory change, at least where I am locally. And that’s something that has given me a lot of hope. I’m very fortunate to be connected to educators and people in leadership that are really about making a difference beyond just kind of the cliched platitudes. They actually wanna make systemic change, in a way that’s positive. And that’s been really helpful for me. So as long as I feel like I’m useful in the classroom for students, and as long as I feel like I’m bringing, I think change, on behalf of teachers and students and administrators and our community in a way that moves the ball down the field, that’s what keeps me motivated. And what I like to ask teachers when I close in the podcast is. “What teacher or teachers have inspired you?”

Eric Cross (15:54):

And for me, I think it would start off with the teachers who cared about me when they didn’t have to, in elementary school all the way through college. And there are numerous teachers. My science-teacher community of practice. For the last two years, I’ve been fortunate to spend every month, once a month, meeting with just a core group of science teachers that really care about some of the things that we are impacted by in the classroom. And when the pandemic was going on, we still met regularly. And because we’re not all teaching in the same place, we kind of were able to bring different perspectives to the table. I think the current classroom teachers and former classroom teachers that I have in my community really inspire me. The ones who are dedicated to opening doors for students. The graduate students that I teach at the University of San Diego, they keep me fresh. I love leaving teaching my 12- and 13-year-olds, and then driving down the street to the university and teaching 20somethings who are all about to be in the classroom. They come with new ideas, they’re asking questions, and I get to actually share things that I just did three hours ago. I think that’s one thing that continues to inspire me. And it’s one of the reasons why I love teaching at the University of San Diego. Their energy and enthusiasm is super-refreshing. And then all the teachers that are willing to take risks and fail forward, to try things different, to ask hard questions, to push the envelope. Teaching’s hard. It’s easy to point out the problems in education as a whole. But after we do that, it’s important to figure out the practical ways we can make the changes that we wanna see.

Eric Cross (17:23):

Now, that’s to say that if you have the capacity for it and the resources and the support. Some of us, we don’t. Some of us, we are on an island, and that’s a really, really difficult place to be, especially when you have family and kids to take care of. And you have to make decisions on what’s best for you and for your own students. We do this work on behalf of kids. And it’s one of the most honorable services a person can provide to our community. But one area for growth that I think we have kind of as a society, is teachers spend their lives, daily, on behalf of the future of our country. For other people’s children. They fall asleep at night worrying about other people’s kids. They spend their own money to create opportunities and experiences that students might not otherwise have. And it’s important that we collectively, and I know I’m preaching the choir when I say this, but this is one of my messages, is that we honor them in turn. We create programs that allow them to be able to afford housing. We create opportunities for them to be able to generate wealth. We create ways for them to be able to find rest, to get connection. And then internally we create systems where they can just work on themselves, fill themselves, get trained, and be whole, so they can bring their best self to the kids in front of them. That’s one of my personal platforms. It’s something that I think is vital. We gotta take care of the people that take care of our kids. So there’s a saying that says, “It’s better to light a candle than to curse the darkness.” And it takes one person to blow out a candle, but one candle can light thousands of other candles, without diminishing its own light. And that’s what we have to be. So my encouragement, teachers, as you’re going into this new school year, and you’re thinking about what’s going on, you’re thinking about all the challenges—and they’re there, and they’re real, and trust me, it’s not like some Pollyanna, like, “Hey, just be positive!” mindset and everything’s gonna be great—no, no, no, no, no. It’s not that. But my encouragement…if I can tell you one thing that’s helped me more than anything else, it’s being connected to other people who are candle-lighters. Because there are a lot of places that are gonna blow out the candle. It could be the staff lounge. It could be Twitter, it could be Reddit. It could be Instagram. It could be TikTok. It could be, you know, anybody. Someone next door to you. There’s a lot of folks that are gonna be willing to point out and say, “Look, this is what’s wrong.” But find the helpers. Find the people that are candle-lighters. And stay connected with them. Find that community. I can tell you for me, that’s been the thing that’s been able to help me sojourn through all of this—I couldn’t do this by myself—is being able to share my story with other teachers and knowing that I’m doing this work alongside of other folks who are doing this work, and I can share my story with them and listen to their stories, is something that’s been able to fill my cup. And so I hope I can do the same for you and for other people listening to other people I come in contact with.

Eric Cross (20:08):

Teachers, I wish you a great school year. Hang in there. Be those candle-lighters and bring your best self on behalf of the students. Thanks so much for listening. Now, we wanna hear more about you. If you have any stories you wanna share about the classroom, please email stem@amplify.com. That’s STEM at amplifycom.wpengine.com. And make sure to click subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts. And join our Facebook group, Science Connections: The Community. Until next time.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Eric Cross says about science

“We do this work on behalf of kids, and it’s one of the most honorable services a person can provide to our community.”

– Eric Cross

K–8 Science teacher, Host of Science Connections: The Podcast

Meet the guest

Eric Cross is a 7th grade science/technology teacher, grade level lead, and digital learning innovator for Albert Einstein Academies, International Baccalaureate schools. He is also an adjunct professor of learning and technology at the University of San Diego and a Google certified innovator. Eric earned a bachelor’s degree from Azusa Pacific University and a Master of Education from the University of San Diego. He had 17 years of experience working with at-risk youth and underserved populations before becoming a middle school teacher. By building relationships with students, colleagues, and the community, he has become an empowered leader in and out of the classroom. Through meaningful learning experiences centered around student agency, STEM has become accessible to students through highly engaging lesson design, thoughtful integration of digital tools, and culturally relevant pedagogy.

Smiling person with short hair and a beard, wearing a collared shirt and sweater, against a dark background. Small star icon on the top left of the circular frame.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. Listen here!

S5-05. Math technology & hacks for math anxiety: research-based tips for caregivers

A blue graphic with text reading "Math Teacher Lounge" in multicolored letters and "Amplify." at the bottom, with abstract geometric shapes and lines as decoration.

We’ve been very lucky to have so many prolific and brilliant researchers on this season of Math Teacher Lounge, and our next guest is no exception.

Listen as we sit down with Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer to discuss what causes math anxiety, math hacks, and how the right math technology can make an incredible impact in children and caregivers coping with math anxiety.

Listen today and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!

Download Transcript

Marjorie Schaeffer (00:00):

I think the most important thing we know from literature right now is that high math-anxious parents, when they interact with their children, their children learn less math over the course of the school year.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:12):

Welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge. I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson.

Dan Meyer (00:15):

And I’m Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:16):

We’re onto Episode 5, Dan, of our series on math anxiety. And I wanna say it feels so lovely to imagine all of these people out there doing work to help combat math anxiety. I dunno, it just makes me feel excited about the possibilities. This work is out there; it’s happening! Kids and teachers and caregivers are being impacted by these conversations. Not just — I mean, I don’t just mean the conversations we’re having on Math Teacher Lounge, but I mean, that these researchers are doing. Like, yes, we can change this!

Dan Meyer (00:53):

This is great. Yeah. We have people who are extremely smart, who have dedicated their professional lives to studying math anxiety and resolving it. And each of them that we’ve chatted with — they share lots of ideas in common, but I’ve loved how they each have their own different flavor or take or area of emphasis on a problem that hits everybody everywhere. It’s in your home, with kids and caregivers. It’s in schools. It’s in our places of teacher preparation and professional learning. Every place is a place where we can focus on resolving issues of math anxiety. It’s exciting.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:26):

Yeah, I feel like … if there could be a course in — we all know that our teacher prep programs, in MOST teacher prep programs, there’s not nearly enough math methods or time to cover <laugh> — it’s like ready, set, go! And depending on who your mentor teacher is or what your math methods course … I mean, it can totally shape the way that you are prepared or really not prepared for going out there to teach math! And so I love that we’re having these conversations.

Dan Meyer (01:55):

What I love about today’s conversation is, one, it’s got a little bit of a technology flavor, so there’s that. But I also love, it’s got one of my favorite features about change, which is that it focuses on change to action, change to routine, rather than change to belief. Rather than saying like, “OK, everybody! Everybody stop thinking bad beliefs about math and transmitting them to your kids!” Instead, it says, “What we’ll do is just, hey, we’ll set that aside for a second and we’re gonna do a certain thing every day and watch as those actions make your beliefs change.” That to me is extremely cool. And I think it has a higher likelihood of success than just, like, me telling parents, “Hey, stop thinking these thoughts!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:37):

“Ready, set, stop being anxious!”

Dan Meyer (02:39):

Exactly. Exactly. So it’s an exciting conversation we’re gonna have here.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:43):

Right. So it’s not a, you know, “wave the wand and all of a sudden, you’re not anxious about math anymore.” But these incremental changes, these incremental conversations, this validation, can really, really impact change. I’m with you on it, Dan. I hear what you’re saying.

Dan Meyer (03:01):

To help us talk through all of these ideas and more, we’re joined by Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer, Assistant Professor of Psychology at St. Mary’s College in Indiana.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:10):

Enjoy. <Jaunty music> So, yes, Dan, we are so excited to welcome Marjorie Schaeffer. She’s Assistant Professor of Psychology at St. Mary’s College. Dr. Schaeffer, we’re so excited you’re here. Hello!

Marjorie Schaeffer (03:28):

Thank you so much for inviting me.

Dan Meyer (03:29):

Yeah. We are super-lucky to have had so many prolific and brilliant researchers about math anxiety on our show. You’ll be no exception. And every time, we love to find out about how you came to study math anxiety, which winds up being a really interesting glimpse into your backstory bio. So tell us, what is the route by which you came toward studying math anxiety?

Marjorie Schaeffer (03:51):

Oh, I love that question. I’m really interested in how the attitudes and beliefs of parents and teachers influence children, especially around math. And I actually became interested in this idea in college, when no Child Left Behind was actually first starting to be implemented in schools with high-stakes standardized testing. So much so that I actually did my thesis on this thinking about, “Do children understand the importance of high-stakes testing? Do they have anxiety around that idea?” And so that was really my first foray into the anxiety literature. And that was kind of the entry point into math anxiety for me.

Dan Meyer (04:28):

So you started by studying a very high-stakes assessment, like our students connecting with this. And the assessment is once per year. And classroom instruction is every day. So how did you move from the assessments to the everyday instruction?

Marjorie Schaeffer (04:44):

That’s a great question. So, after college, I actually taught kindergarten. And so from that, I saw the day-to-day impact of instruction and the day-to-day impact of children’s individual attitudes and beliefs. And so I really became interested in thinking about, “How do we understand why some children are really successful from the instruction happening in classrooms and why other children need a little bit more support?” And so math anxiety was one way for me to really think about the individual differences I saw in my kindergarten classroom.

Dan Meyer (05:18):

It feels like you headed … you went farther upstream, is what it feels like. Where assessment … there’s like some kind of anxiety around assessment, let’s say. And then you ventured farther up the stream to classroom instruction and then still farther into kids’ homes. It seems like your research invokes a lot of curiosity about the sources of a kind of amorphous, flowing phenomenon called math anxiety. And I’d love to hear a bit about what you know about how caregivers transfer, transmit — whatever the word is — math anxiety to their kids.

Marjorie Schaeffer (05:55):

For parents … we think that the attitudes and beliefs of parents matter. And we see that for lots of areas, not just math anxiety. But I think math anxiety, we see that really clearly. And so, we can think about it both in terms of what kind of input parents provide. So, how do families talk about math with their children? What kind of support do they provide around homework? And those are ones that I think are a little obvious. But we can also think about the offhanded comments that parents say to children when they’re talking about math generally. Right? So, we see lots of memes going around, talking about how hard math homework is. And so, I think when parents say offhanded comments like, “I’m not a math person,” or “We’re just bad at math,” that communicates values to children. I think the most important thing we know from literature right now is that high math-anxious parents, when they interact with their children, their children learn less math over the course of the school year. And this specific mechanism by which that happens is still an area for a lot of research. And so some people think it’s about input. So maybe if I’m math anxious, I’m avoiding math. And so, when I have an option to read a picture book that has math content, I focus on the colors instead. And so, my child is actually getting less math than other children. We can also think it’s about these messages that are provided. So, when I talk about math, I send the message to my child, it’s not for them, and therefore the child wants to engage in it less. And some of my work looks at things like expectations and values. So, thinking about, “Do math-anxious families actually value math less than other families unintentionally?” And so, we have some support for this idea that they expect less of their children. And so maybe when they struggle, they respond in different ways than a family who’s lower in math anxiety.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:53):

This is so fascinating to me. I also was a kindergarten teacher. And I remember a mom who just … she had such like palpable math anxiety. And during one of our conversations, she was talking about these homework sessions with her daughter. And I may have mentioned this on the podcast before. But she was talking about how every night they would sit together and they would do all this math. They’d do, like, extra math together. And it always ended in tears. And despite her math anxiety, she didn’t want her daughter to experience the math anxiety that she did. So she was trying to pile it on, so her daughter was more proficient and comfortable. And instead, it was perpetuating this anxiety about it. And so, it’s a phenomenon then, right? Even if a parent is saying, like you said, maybe completely unwilling, this mother was actually trying to do the opposite. She was trying to help, you know, imbue the love and comfort with math. Right?

Marjorie Schaeffer (09:01):

Absolutely. This is why I think in my research, it’s really important that we find low-stakes, low-stress ways for high math-anxious families to do math. They absolutely can support their children in doing math. But they need a little support. We want it to be a fun, low-stakes environment, right? So maybe that’s the connection back to high-stakes testing, that I want children to have fun math experiences.

Dan Meyer (09:28):

Yeah. This is challenging, because it feels like the more caregivers know about math anxiety, and its pernicious effects on students, and how easily transmitted it is, one could become quite anxious about math anxiety. And, you know, no one makes great decisions when they’re anxious. So if I’m recalling our various episodes we’ve done, we’ve heard from people say, “Well, you need to validate students’ math anxiety. This is not something to just ignore or brush past. But also, not validate it in a way that says, you know, ‘This is OK and generational and inevitable.’” Which presents parents with a very thin path to follow, it seems like. So I love what you’re saying about how we gotta just de-stress the whole process.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:11):

You’re avoiding the whole, “I wasn’t a math person either” kind of thing. <laugh>

Dan Meyer (10:15):

Right, right, right. Yeah. So I’d love to know more. We’re excited about the technology that you have studied and helped develop, presumably, called Bedtime Math, anapp for caregivers. And I’d love to know more about what that is and what it offers parents who know enough about math to know that they don’t want to transmit math anxiety to their children, but also want to support. So what does that offer them?

Marjorie Schaeffer (10:39):

So Bedtime Math is an app. It’s freely available on iTunes or the Apple Store or Google Play. And what it’s designed to do is to provide a nightly topical passage. So one of my favorites is the one about Groundhogs Day. And so it talks a little bit about the history of Groundhogs Day, and then it asks math-related follow-up questions. So starting at a preschool level, going through late fifth grade. And it’s really meant for parents to pick the one that meets their children where they are. And so the preschool-level question asks children to pretend to be a groundhog and walk to the left and walk to the right. So a skill that families might not think about as being math, but we actually think that IS part of understanding math. Understanding left and right directionality. And then the next question can ask questions like, “If it took the groundhog three seconds to climb out of the hole, and then two more seconds to see its shadow, how much time did it take all together?” So a simple addition problem, but it’s phrased in a fun way. And so the hope is that for high math-anxious families, these interactions are fun and playful. They don’t look like fights over homework. They’re just conversations that families can have around topics that are naturally interesting to children. And our hope is that when families have lots of these positive low-stakes interactions, they actually can see that we can talk about math in unstressful ways. In lots of ways, right? We can also do this at the grocery store. We can also do this while we’re cooking in the kitchen. It doesn’t just have to be fights over homework.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:14):

And I actually have the Bedtime Math — one of the Bedtime Math books. And I was so excited to find out that there’s an app. And I think one of the things that I loved about the book is that these are invitations, right? They’re exactly that. Low pressure <laugh>, and they’re invitations to have a conversation. And if we were just to tell parents, “Oh, just count!” or, “Hey, just count wherever you go!” You know? No. It’s, in a way, I think, like you said, it’s retraining the parents on what math could look like. Like, “Oh, I didn’t even think we could just kind of have this conversation and we’re actually doing math together.”

Marjorie Schaeffer (12:55):

Yes, absolutely. I absolutely agree. We want it to be fun and playful and not stressful. And we want it to also be things that are meaningful to children’s lives. So these are topics children are interested in. It’s not that we are using flashcards or making children practice math facts over and over again. These are things children should wanna do that can naturally fit into a child’s routine. So almost all families read books before bed, and what we hope is that math can also be a part of the nighttime routine.

Dan Meyer (13:27):

There’s something really subtle here going on that I just wanna name and ask a question about. First of all, it’s cool that you started with studying high-stakes stuff and now you are developing low-stakes stuff. And I’m really curious what makes a thing low-stakes? Like, a few things I’m hearing from you is that there’s, like … I have a small child that I read literature to on a nightly basis. And I feel very anxiety-free doing that. And it’s almost as though, because each of the — tasks is the wrong word for this, but experiences — involve some reading, it puts me, the parent, in a mode that is comfortable and familiar to me. I’m curious: Are there other, as you design, what, one per day for a year? All these different experiences. What are some of the principles that you lean on that help make a thing low-stakes for kids and for parents?

Marjorie Schaeffer (14:17):

Yeah, that’s a great question. So one thing we wanted to be really intentional about is that our app doesn’t look like a lot of traditional apps. There isn’t noises that go off. You don’t enter an answer. And so one of the things that we thought made it low-stakes is that while there is a right or wrong answer — there is a correct answer — we aren’t giving children upsetting feedback. Instead, what we wanna encourage families to do is, if you struggle to remember how many seconds it took the groundhog to come out of the hole, you can work through that with a parent. So it doesn’t feel like you’re getting negative feedback; you’re being told you’re bad at math; you did it wrong. Instead, you’re just getting natural support moving forward. And so that’s one thing we wanted to be really intentional about, was that it wasn’t going to be a negative experience for children. And we are trying to build on all of the positive interactions families are having around nightly book reading. So many ways this can look very similar. You get to read another story that’s topical and hopefully interesting. And then do these little questions together. And so for a lot of families, their children don’t actually really look at the question. It almost feels like the parent is just asking them on their own. Like, they just came up with it. They just wanted to know what would happen to the groundhog. If there were three more groundhogs? How many groundhogs would we have all together? Not like it’s gonna be like homework or other parts.

Dan Meyer (15:38):

So my understanding is that there isn’t a blank into which people type a number in, press “submit” for evaluation, receive the red X, the green check. That’s a key part of the design here.

Marjorie Schaeffer (15:50):

Yes, absolutely. And for research purposes, we would’ve loved to know what families were saying. But we think it’s really important that it’s fun, interactive, that families are working together to get to the right answer, that it’s not a test for children.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:03):

In your research, when you were — maybe you could walk us through the study a little bit. But I’m also curious if you heard from parents that it was carrying over beyond the bedtime routine. Because I would imagine, if I am building these skills and reading these questions and learning that I could talk to my kid like this about math in a fun way, that’s gonna happen then, like you said, when I’m in the grocery store. Or when I’m waiting in line for at the bank. Or whatever, you know? People go into banks now still, right?

Marjorie Schaeffer (16:35):

Yeah, absolutely. So in our study, we recruited almost 600 families and we randomly assigned them. So they had an equal chance of getting both our math app and what we call our control app. And that’s really just a math app without the math. We think of it as a reading control app. And that’s because we wanna make sure that families are having a similar experience, that it’s not just that having high-quality, fun interactions with your child is actually impacting children’s math achievement. And so what we then did is followed those children over the course of early elementary school. And so we worked with them in schools in the fall and spring of first, second, and third grade, really to look at their math learning. And so what we find is that children of high math-anxious adults, when they have the reading app, so what we think of as what’s happening in the real world, we see that really classic gap between children of high math-anxious adults and children of low math-anxious adults. So if you have a high math-anxious parent, you’re learning about three months less math over the course of first grade. But for children who receive this math app, we see this gap as closed. Those children look no different than a low math-anxious parent. And so that’s leading us to think that we’ve helped families talk about math in fundamentally different ways. We did a little bit of just talking to families to see a little bit about what might be going on. And a lot of families do report exactly what you’re describing, where they say this did help them talk about math in different ways they were doing it other times.

Dan Meyer (18:10):

That’s a really extraordinary study design. I don’t know … I love that you folks gave the control group not nothing. Like it’s possible that just parents and kids bonding over a thing regularly would be enough to provoke some kind of academic gain. But you gave the control group a thing that had them interacting socially, bonding, and still this large common gap between high-anxious and low-anxious parents, their kids shrunk together. Is that what I’m gathering here?

Marjorie Schaeffer (18:41):

Yeah, absolutely. So we’re basically seeing we can no longer, when we look at children’s data, say that parents’ math anxiety explains individual differences. So these children look really similar. They’re learning more than children who has a high math-anxious parent and just got our reading control app.

Dan Meyer (19:01):

just diving into the study a little bit more here, what is the time commitment? Or, did you guide parents to say, “All right, we’re gonna do this do this delightful story about a badger for an hour”? Or did people do it for five minutes? And what was the time commitment, roughly, for people?

Marjorie Schaeffer (19:17):

So we tell families to do it however they see fit. Because it is an app, we are able to get some sense of how long, and we are talking about three to six minutes for many families. For a lot of families, they’re reading a paragraph, the paragraph and a half, and then answering one or two questions. They’re not going through every possible question. They’re just doing a little bit, really meeting their kids where they are.

Dan Meyer (19:39):

Roughly how many times per week was that?

Marjorie Schaeffer (19:41):

So we asked families to do it as much as it fit. But we’re seeing about two and a half on average in the first year. And so families are fitting it in a couple of nights a week. It’s not every night.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:52):

So what it sounds like you’re saying is what really was powerful about this app is that it was the space and time and prompts between the caregiver and the child, that chance to really sit down and have some of these meaningful and positive math interactions. How did it shift those relationships?

Marjorie Schaeffer (20:12):

So one of the things I think that makes the app effective is the changing of expectations. After a year, families are really using the app a lot less. And I think that’s OK, that they have found other ways to incorporate math into their lives. And we find that we don’t see an impact on their math anxiety, that they aren’t becoming less math anxious from this experience. Which I think makes sense, because they have had a lifetime of math anxiety. But we do see a change in parents’ expectations and value of math. So they expect their children will be better at math, and they also report that math is more important in their children’s lives. And so I think that’s an important part of it, which is, we can change these values for families, even if we aren’t able to change the math anxiety of the adults in children’s lives.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:01):

I want to for a second before — because I’m loving this idea of the app, and I’m excited to find out more ways to cultivate these conversations in my home and also share this with other folks. Because even folks who don’t even maybe realize they have math anxiety … like you said, so often it’s unconscious. So often we’re putting these little snippets into our everyday conversation, like, “Oh yeah, I’m not a math person.” And we don’t even realize how much is impacting our kiddos and ourselves, right? So I am really curious: What do you think … in your research, what were some other takeaways that you feel like are really strategies that we can think about for combating math anxiety in general?

Marjorie Schaeffer (21:47):

So I’m particularly interested in thinking about how math-anxious adults can help tone down their anxiety so that they can have high-quality interactions with their children, that they interact with. And so one of the big takeaways for my research, I think, is that math-anxious families can help their children with math. They just need support. And so I think there are lots of ways for that support to look like. One, I think it can be an app, but I also think reading a little bit about math can be really helpful. So it’s not new. So the first time you aren’t thinking about some of these ideas is as your child has their homework open in front of you. And so you can process your own feelings separately before you have to do it with a child. I also think reminding parents that math is everywhere and that math is actually lots of things that we all love to do. Math isn’t just calculus. Not that calculus isn’t wonderful. But that math is measuring, math is counting ducks at the park. Math is talking about how many times did I go down this slide. And talking about math in this way, I think reminds families that they are great at that. That even if maybe they’ve had bad math experiences before, they can do math. Especially the way their preschool or early childhood, early elementary school student needs them to. And I think that can then set the foundation for being really successful later.

Dan Meyer (23:13):

So is your research then, your subsequent studies, your line of inquiry, is moving more towards how to support parents, then? Is that what I’m hearing?

Marjorie Schaeffer (23:22):

Yeah. So I’m really interested in both understanding how the math anxiety of parents and teachers influences children. And so math anxiety is really common and we know that it’s particularly common in early elementary school teachers. And so it’s very likely that children are interacting with a highly math-anxious adult. And so I’m really interested in thinking about how we can support those individuals in doing it. And so both, I think, things like Bedtime Math, which provide fun, unscripted ways to do that, but I’m also interested in the teacher equivalent. So, thinking about whether having things like a math coach can help teachers have more positive experiences with math. So if you see someone else play math games with your students, can that help you do it as well?

Dan Meyer (24:09):

It makes me wonder a lot about an app for teachers or an app for parents, one that’s not designed to be co-consumed with kids and their parents. But what that would look like … yeah, that’s really interesting.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:21):

If we have a parent who, let’s say they have a third grader, fourth grader, fifth grader, or a middle schooler, right? Outside of early education. And they say, “OK, but what do I do? I’m with my kiddo; I don’t remember this math.” And they’re realizing that their anxiety may be influencing their kiddos’ disposition of mathematics, Or maybe they’re just in the midst of the battle <laugh>. What would you say to those folks, especially if it’s math that maybe they’re not comfortable with?

Marjorie Schaeffer (24:56):

One, I think we should like tone down the stress, right? Remind ourselves that it’s homework and homework feels really high-stakes, but these other outcomes are really high-stakes too, right? And so I’m really interested in the idea that can we help parents feel more comfortable about math by watching their own children teach it to them. So what’s a concept that the fourth grader actually feels really good about? And can they remind their parent how to do it? Can, together, they problem-solve the math homework? And so it’s not just on the parent to give the child the right answer. We know that’s a recipe for communicating some negative things about math. But instead, help the parent-child pair figure it out together. So what are some resources we can do? Can we look it up on the internet together? Can we write an email to the teacher together? Can we think about what are other problems that maybe we know how to do, and therefore we can use that same model here? So I want parents to feel like they are not solely responsible for it. That they can help figure it out with their child together. And so it’s a fun interaction.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (26:02):

I love that. I love that.

Dan Meyer (26:03):

Yeah. Yeah. That’s wonderful. Yeah. A conviction that I have, and I think it’s true, is that any math that we’re learning at middle school, the attraction can be dialed down to a degree that a very small child, or a parent who has a very small child’s understanding of math, can appreciate. So instead of calculation, estimation. Instead of proof, just make a claim about something. And it makes me wonder about a companion to the work that’s happening in schools that parents feel inadequate to support, that students might not want to teach their parents. But which they could both, on a daily basis, say, “Here’s a way we can engage in this at a level that is comfortable to both of us.” Just dreaming out loud here. No question asked. No response needed. I just love your work. And made me wonder about that. Can you let me know your thoughts about technology? It is very rare that we have someone on the call who is an academic and very well-versed in research, but who also is published not just in in papers and textbooks, but also in digital media. It’s consumed by lots of people. So I am trusting that you have opinions about how math looks in technology. And I wonder if you’d offer some thoughts about how it goes, right? How it goes wrong from your own eyes.

Marjorie Schaeffer (27:14):

OK. That’s a great question. I think that we need more research. I first wanna say that I think that technology has really exploded in the last few years. How children have access to technology and screen times has really changed. And what we need is high-quality research happening. That said, I think that all of the things we know from child-development research still apply to technology. And so we know that children learn best when they are engaging in interactions with their parents. And so when families can use technology together, or at least can talk about what’s happening, it can be really effective. I also think technology, especially math apps, are best at teaching concrete skills with very clear answers. So I think practicing math facts is a great use of technology. So I love that Sushi math app where you solve multiplication problems and then get to quickly pull the sushi off the cart, right? But for higher-level questions, where we’re thinking about word problems or where what we’re helping to teach students is complex thinking, apps have a harder time doing that. Because students can often figure out the answer without engaging in the thinking that we are hoping that they’ll learn. And so I think technology absolutely has a piece. I think technology is helpful for parents. I think the logistics of helping parents live their lives is a good reason to use technology. But I think we need to be conscious of what it’s replacing. And so I think a world in which we think fourth graders can learn math only from apps is not realistic. But absolutely apps can be a great supplement to what’s already happening in the classroom.

Dan Meyer (28:56):

Yeah, that’s super-helpful. We have done a lot of work in digital curriculum here at Amplify, and often face the question on a daily basis, “Should this math be digital or on paper? Should we have the students stand up and talk or type something?” And those decisions are way too crucial and way more sensitive than a lot of the app-based education gives credit to. So appreciate your perspective there.

Marjorie Schaeffer (29:22):

OK. And I don’t think there’s one answer, or one answer for all classrooms. I think it’s like always a balancing act. I do think that one of the reasons our work is successful is because the parent-child interaction. And we want parents to learn from these experiences. And I think the same thing is true for for teachers.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:41):

Dr. Schaeffer, thank you so much for being with us today and for sharing about your research, and again, for inviting us to reconsider ways that we can develop a more positive relationship with math. And that parent or caregiver or teacher relationship with a child, we’re seeing just how incredibly impactful that is. And I really appreciate your work and your voice on this. Thank you so much for your time.

Dan Meyer (30:07):

Thank you.

Marjorie Schaeffer (30:08):

Thank you for having me.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:12):

Thank you again, Dr. Schaeffer, and thank you all for listening to our conversation. You can check out the show notes for more on Dr. Schaeffer’s work and to see a link to the app that we shared about Bedtime Math.

Dan Meyer (30:25):

Please keep in touch with us on Facebook at Math Teacher Lounge Community, and on Twitter at MTLShow.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:32):

We would love to hear … you’ve been listening to this series; we’re dipping our toe into all these aspects of math anxiety. Is there something that you’re still wondering about? Something you wanna share about your own story with math anxiety?

Dan Meyer (30:43):

And if you haven’t already, if this is your first exposure to the Math Teacher Lounge podcast, please subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge, wherever you get your fine podcast products. And if you like what you’re hearing, please rate us! Leave us a review. You’ll help more listeners find the show.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:01):

And let a friend know. But you know, it’s, it’s nice and cozy here in the Lounge, right? There’s no pressure. We’re hanging out. It’s all about learning. We’re learning together. We’re glad you’re here and we want others in your community to join us in the Lounge as well. You can find more information on all of Amplify’s shows at our podcast hub. Go to amplifycom.wpengine.com/hub. Next time on Math Teacher Lounge, we’re gonna be chatting about where we are today that we weren’t a few months ago in this topic.

Dan Meyer (31:31):

We’ll be chatting about this last series about math anxiety, and trading our favorite insights and observations from the run of the season.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:41):

I just love this series, Dan. And thanks, all, for listening. We really appreciate having you in the Lounge.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Marjorie Schaeffer says about math

“We want it to be a fun, low-stakes environment, especially in high-stakes scenarios like testing. We want children to have fun math experiences.”

– Marjorie Schaeffer

Assistant Professor of Psychology at Saint Mary’s College

Meet the guest

Marjorie Schaeffer is an assistant professor of psychological sciences at Saint Mary’s College. She received her Ph.D in developmental psychology from the University of Chicago. Marjorie is interested in the role parents and teachers play in the development of children’s math attitudes and performance. She is specifically interested in the impact of expectations and anxiety and on children’s academic performance. Her work has been published in outlets including ScienceJournal of Experimental Psychology: General, and Developmental Science.

A laptop displaying a Facebook group page for "Math Teacher Lounge Community," featuring profile photos, a group banner, and geometric shapes in the image background.

About Math Teacher Lounge

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Program details

Get started with Amplify Reading: 6–8 Edition.

Cuatro personajes con distintos disfraces y una gran máquina robótica con garras visibles se encuentran juntos sobre un fondo blanco.

Introduction

Amplify Reading 6–8 is a digital reading program laser-focused on helping students find deeper meaning in texts by teaching them to question everything they read.

To capture students’ imagination, Amplify Reading 6–8 takes the form of an interactive graphic novel called The Last Readers. This story is set in a dystopian future world run by Machines, where people are told what to read and what to think. But dissent is afoot. Recruited for the rebellion, students are trained in the powerful ways authors convey meaning and affect their audience.

What students learn

Exploring texts from literary classics to propaganda, from great speeches to scientific articles, students learn to analyze the moves that authors make to achieve their purposes. Chapter topics alternate between the close analysis of arguments and literary analysis.

Each chapter should take approximately one hour for students to complete.

How to integrate this program into your curriculum

Amplify Reading 6–8 is designed for students to work independently as they progress through the chapters of The Last Readers. For the last chapter of each book, teachers have the option to build on independent work through group and whole-class activities.

For the best experience, students should complete the chapters in order. The chapters and concepts build on each other and were designed to help students master close reading skills. While teachers can unlock chapters so students can work on specific concepts at any given moment, doing so may result in a less-than-ideal experience. Later lessons are locked by default, but we will provide the ability to unlock lessons from within the teacher dashboard.

How teachers are using Amplify Reading 6–8

Reinforcement of concepts

Many teachers find the program extremely helpful for reinforcing key reading skills in the core curriculum. They use it in class one or two times a week for 20 to 30 minutes over the course of a year.

Test preparation

The program features extensive practice with text-dependent questions, providing a fun and effective way for students to get comfortable answering those kinds of questions.

Other common uses

Teachers also use the program to introduce key close reading concepts, for extra practice or homework, as response to intervention, and for after-school and summer school programs.

Routines

  • Devoting one class period every week or two to having students work independently on The Last Readers. While students are working independently on devices, teachers can work with small groups who need extra support with their core curriculum work. Teachers can also assign students work in Practice Mode during class or for homework.
  • Treating each book of The Last Readers as a 2–3 week mini-unit that can be inserted between units of core curriculum instruction. In addition to having students work on the chapters during class, teachers can assign students work in Practice Mode in between chapters or for homework.
  • Regularly assigning The Last Readers to students as homework. Because students may move through the chapters at different paces, teachers may want to assign one chapter per week and ask students to work in Practice Mode for the rest of the week after they complete a chapter.

Pedagogical approach

In Amplify Reading 6–8:

  1. Students learn to question everything they read by engaging with a story-based adventure in which understanding every piece of text and every article, billboard, speech and poem is essential to the narrative.
  2. Students learn to leverage the same devices used by authors to convey meaning by creating new content that integrates seamlessly with the story.

Unlike other reading supplementals that rely solely on assessment questions and feedback, Amplify Reading 6–8 weaves digital instruction together with assessment, all within an immersive story where the analysis of text is a critical element of the plot. The storytelling is vivid, suspenseful, and complex, designed to provide students with purpose and agency as they take on ever more challenging and high-stakes close reading tasks.

Each mission includes three steps:

  1. Interactive instruction: Students engage with a specific close reading concept using digital manipulatives.
  2. Guided close reading: Students apply knowledge of the concept to a complex text.
  3. Creative application: Students use their knowledge of the concept to create new content that solves a story-based problem.

Literary and informational passages are paired with carefully crafted, text-dependent questions and technology-enhanced items that prepare students for the same types of questions they’ll face on high stakes assessments. All along the way, teachers receive reports that visualize activity and progress, and highlight areas of improvement. Teachers can also leverage the original content generated by students in each mission as a rich classroom discussion piece.

Combining content and pedagogy with the creativity and purpose of storytelling results in an experience that truly motivates students and gives them the skills and confidence to tackle complex text.

Standards and alignments

Download the complete scope and sequence.

The practice of close reading lies at the heart of the Common Core and many other state standards for English Language Arts. Instruction in close reading enables students to become attuned to the essential elements of authentic texts: from key ideas and claims to specific details and evidence; from the effects of single words to those of larger textual structures; from the significance of individual texts to the interrelated meanings of entire corpora.

The recent focus on close reading is reflected in the text-dependent questions that populate many recent state assessments of ELA proficiency. Text-dependent questions address students’:

  • understanding of vocabulary
  • understanding of syntax and structure
  • understanding of literary and argumentative devices
  • understanding of themes and central ideas

Amplify Reading 6–8 gives students the essential skills and confidence they need to address text-dependent questions and the standards to which they refer.

Additionally, each book of The Last Readers emphasizes at least one Common Core reading anchor standards associated with each of the ELA standards strands:

Book 1: KID 1 / C&S 4 / IKI 8

Book 2: KID 1, 2, 3 / C&S 4, 5, 6 / IKI 8

Book 3: KID 1, 2, 3 / C&S 4, 5, 6 / IKI 6, 7, 8

Levels

Because each classroom represents a wide range of reading abilities, teachers can assign students to unique learning tracks that are tailored to provide the level of support each student needs.

After your students have enrolled in a class, you can assign them to a particular level in Reporting. All students will be automatically enrolled in the Core level. It is recommended that you assign all students to whatever level is most appropriate for them before they begin chapter 1. You can change a student’s level at any time.

LEVELDESIGNED FOR

CORE

Students whose reading levels fall within the middle school band.

EXTRA SUPPORT

Students who are reading below middle school level or with limited English proficiency. The instructional content and texts have been adapted or replaced to support students who “can engage in complex, cognitively demanding social and academic activities requiring language when provided moderate linguistic support.” Support includes streamlined, scaffolded content that integrates the built-in-dictionary tool, so students can access content and academic vocabulary at their language level and above. For productive written activities, students are given supports such as sentence frames to help them develop structured academic responses.


ADVANCED (coming soon)

We are developing an advanced level that will challenge readers with more complex texts and prompts, and with additional content.

Included texts

Book 1

Book 2

Book 3

S1-01: The journey from student to SpaceX engineer: Juan Vivas

Illustration of Earth with text about a podcast episode featuring Juan Vivas, discussing the journey from student to SpaceX engineer. Includes a photo of a smiling person in a suit.

In this episode, we join Eric Cross as he talks to supply chain engineer Juan Vivas of SpaceX about his experiences growing up as a Latino in STEM. Juan shares his story of moving to the United States to study engineering and becoming successful in his career as a scientist. Juan openly discusses the experiences that made a difference in his life and the teachers that inspired him along the way. He also shares his experience as an engineer in different fields, as well as what it’s like to work in the supply chain during COVID.

Explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page.

Download Transcript

Juan Vivas (00:00):

But to me, based on my experience so far, I think the best way to put it: An engineer is a technical problem-solver.

Eric Cross (00:28):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. My guest today is Juan Vivas. Juan is a supply chain engineer for SpaceX. His career in STEM has pivoted from chemical engineering to working on foods like Cinnamon Toast Crunch to his current role at SpaceX, where he’s responsible for his work on Starlink, a technology that uses low-orbit satellites to provide internet access across the world. In this episode, Juan shares his story of how he became an engineer and how a thoughtful teacher used robotics to inspire him. I hope you enjoy this great conversation with Juan Vivas. Juan, thanks for being here.

Juan Vivas (01:14):

Yeah, yeah, of course! Super-excited to be here.

Eric Cross (01:19):

Hey, and starting off, I kind of like to ask your origin story. We were talking earlier about Marvel, and your journey of one working for…what I consider the closest thing that we have to SHIELD in the Marvel stories is SpaceX. Like with my own students, we talk about SpaceX like it’s a fictional thing, and we watch the rocket launches together and we watch the recovery and it’s so cool.

Juan Vivas (01:45):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (01:46):

And so when I knew that we were gonna be able to talk to you, I was excited. Like, I felt like I was a kid.

Juan Vivas (01:51):

<Laugh>

Eric Cross (01:51):

So I’d love to hear your origin story of you ultimately landing at SpaceX. And begin wherever kind of seems most natural to you.

Juan Vivas (01:59):

Yeah, yeah, of course. You know, I wasn’t one of those kids at from a young age I said “Oh, I’m gonna be an engineer.” Right? “I want to go and build all these things.” Where I grew up, and the social circle that I had, a lot of people were like doctors or lawyers. Just figured, you know, I’ll go to med school and go down the same path that 90% of like everyone else was gonna take. But in high school, I actually got into robotics. And, kind of like I mentioned, I wanted to do med school, that is what I figured I would end up doing. And then I got into robotics in high school. And I think that was what really kind of like changed my perspective of what I wanted to do, because basically these competitions were just—it was full-on driven by students. So we designed, programmed, and manufactured, like, the entire robot itself. And so through that I ended up doing a summer engineering program at the University of Maryland, the summer before going into my senior year in high school. And there we worked on a competition with underwater robots. And so we spent the entire summer, kind of similar scenario, designing a robot, manufacturing it, programming it. And then in the end it was like a competition in the buoyancy tank with different teams. And, you know, I think one thing that was really neat about that experience is that I got to hear Dr. John C. Mathers, who is a Nobel Prize physicist, speak to us in a room with, like, only 10 high school students. And just hearing his experience of where he started and the accomplishment that he’s been able to do, down in the STEM path, was really neat. And that summer was my final decision that I’m “OK, I know I want to be an engineer.” What’s interesting is I ended up choosing chemical engineering, instead of mechanical, which a lot of people, you know, based on all the experience that led me up to be an engineer, they asked me why I didn’t choose mechanical engineering. And I think one of the reasons why I chose chemical engineering is it’s very process-based. So one thing needs to happen, and there’s different inputs to that one step, and that step has an end-to-end reaction to it, right? So certain things need to happen in step one in order for step two to occur. And however the inputs happen in step one, it’s gonna affect the rest of the process. Honestly, very different than what I thought it was really gonna be. But what’s neat about chemical engineering is that it’s one of the most versatile engineering majors that you can have. Chemical engineering, because you work with a lot of process bases. Everything has a process, right? Everything needs to start with step one, and with, you know, step 10, whatever. And it’s all about optimization and improvement along those processes. So you can really take chemical engineering principles and apply ’em to different areas of a career, which is essentially the experience that I had in college. I had three internships with Dow Chemical where I did environmental health and safety, production, and supply-chain improvement. I then did research and development with Clorox. And then I did manufacturing engineering with General Mills. So really different job roles, different aspects, but same methodology applied.

Eric Cross (05:36):

I feel like there’s so much that you just said, <laugh> and I was trying to always, “I wanna ask him about that!” And in there, what I heard was there was a real pivotable, pivot moment in your life. Was the club…or was it a club, the robotics program? Or was that a class?

Juan Vivas (05:53):

You know, it was actually…it was VEX Robotics, specifically.

Eric Cross (05:56):

It was VEX! OK. Yeah, yeah. Really popular. And they still have it; I think we actually have some downstairs. So it was a club, and not necessarily a formal environment, where you were able to build. And it’s both collaborative and competitive, right? Like, there’s both aspects.

Juan Vivas (06:11):

Yep. Yep.

Eric Cross (06:11):

And, and then you had access to one of the only two facilities in the country that have these…were they buoyancy tanks?

Juan Vivas (06:20):

Buoyancy tanks, yep.

Eric Cross (06:21):

And there’s this book, Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers, and then another similar book called Balance. It talks about how some of these innovators, like Steve Jobs and, and Bill Gates, they had access to things that other people didn’t. So, like, Bill Gates, I think at the University of Washington, had a computer that, you know, no one else did. And Jobs had one at, like, Hewlett-Packard. So it gave you this awesome headstart, where you’re able to test things in a real-life environment that kind of transfers into real-world skills. And then a few internships, so like, internships and mentors. So you had these people in the industry or people who were front-runners that were able to pour into you and give you these opportunities. And so it’s really neat to see how a program that starts as a club, kind of a competitive thing that introduced you to it and hooked you, then led to unfolding all of these opportunities that ultimately led you up to being here. And there’s one part—in looking at your LinkedIn profile, there’s a couple of really cool things that stand out. There’s a lot of cool things, but there’s two that really stood out. So one, working at SpaceX, and we’ll talk more about that, but I wanna go to General Mills and Cinnamon Toast Crunch. Because Cinnamon Toast Crunch is amazing.

Juan Vivas (07:39):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (07:39):

And you were part of the supply chain for that. In my head, I’m thinking, OK, like, what is he like responsible for? Like, getting the cinnamon and sugar?

Juan Vivas (07:51):

<Laugh>

Eric Cross (07:51):

What was, what did your job entail, when you were running that?

Juan Vivas (07:55):

There, I didn’t even know what I was gonna be doing until my first day. It was just, whatever the business need is, that’s where you’re gonna be put. So this was actually a high-priority plan for General Mills. And the production line that made Cinnamon Toast Crunch was split up into processes. So you have, they call it the process-process side, which is like literally raw materials, like making the cereal from scratch, baking it, adding the sugar, and then sending it to be packaged. And then you have the packaging-process side. so I was then placed as a packaging process lead, for the packaging side of that production line. So I was accountable for two packaging lines that packed out Cinnamon Toast Crunch. And that is where—that was actually my first real, you know, call it “real job,” like graduated college, going straight into the industry. I was a process lead for the packaging side of Cinnamon Toast Crunch.

Eric Cross (08:54):

So you went from cereal to rockets, <laugh>, which which is an amazing trajectory to have.

Juan Vivas (09:03):

Yeah. Yeah.

Eric Cross (09:04):

And when you kind of mentioned, back in your story about medical school, and, you know, it’s kinda like, what you see people doing, and you’re “OK, this is what I think I wanna do.” And then we have a perception in our mind about what a certain job’s gonna be like. And then reality hits. I think a lot of—when I ask my students, “What do you wanna do?” They think, like, “lawyer!” and when they think “lawyer!” they’re like, “I’m good at arguing!” Right? And until they find—until they talk to some lawyers and they find out like what that career can look like.

Juan Vivas (09:28):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (09:28):

You’re not just in the courtroom showing off your arguing skills. But, like, an engineer, when I talk to my students about what does it mean to be an engineer, often it’s very linear. It’s “I build bridges,” or, you know, maybe cars, but you’re a supply chain engineer. And, and that’s something that I think, now more than ever, it’s probably an incredibly critical role, especially considering that all of these supply constraints. Can you—what is a supply chain engineer? And what does it look like in your day-to-day? How is engineering rolled into that?

Juan Vivas (10:03):

Yeah, yeah. I think that’s an excellent question. I, too, once thought that engineering was just “I’m gonna be actually making something physical,” and like being super engineer-y about it. But, to me, based on my experience so far, I think the best way to put it: An engineer is a technical problem solver. As a supply chain engineer, specifically right now in my role at SpaceX…you know, as you can guess, the supply chain in the entire world is crazy. There’s no raw materials anywhere, and nothing can ever get on time. And so what I work on is I help our suppliers develop processes to meet the design criteria that we set up for like a specific part. As my job as a supply chain engineer, it’s “Can I take this design and make it manufacturable?” Right? “Can I go to any supplier and can they actually make this to the tolerance that the design engineer set them to be?” Nine out of 10 cases, the answer is no, essentially, is the best high-level way to put it.

Eric Cross (11:10):

When you’re solving these problems, is it this iterative process of going back and forth? Or is it just this aha-moment when you finally figure things out? ‘Cause I imagine they’re coming up with a design; you’re going back and saying, “Can this be manufactured?” or “Can it be done?” They’re saying no 90% of the time. And then are you the one responsible for kind of iterating on this, or changing it and then going back to them and telling them, asking them, until you get a yes? Is that—

Juan Vivas (11:33):

Yep. Yep, yep. Exactly. So we go through a process called Design for Manufacturing, DFMing. And where I essentially take, you know, the design engineer’s proposal, and then I have conversations with the suppliers, and then, that’s where the iteration begins. Where we go back and forth, back and forth, until we kind of meet in the middle to have something that can be manufacturable. Most of the times, in my experience, suppliers will always tell you no, just because they always want something that is manufactured really easily. And so you just gotta learn through experience. Like, when are they actually telling you something that’s a fact, versus when they’re just trying to you know, get out of a tolerance, or that “all right, all right, they mentioned that would just like make their jobs a little bit more difficult.”

Eric Cross (12:17):

So I’m hearing like there’s soft skills that are woven into the technical skills that you also need to be able to have.

Juan Vivas (12:23):

Oh, yes, absolutely. Yeah. I think, you know, as an engineer—and this is something, again, that I feel like you can only learn through experience—you’re gonna see that it’s not just you working to solve this one problem. Especially for a supply chain engineer. You’re talking with marketing; you’re talking with an industrial design team; you’re talking with logistics; you’re talking with procurement, materials management—just a whole set of people that don’t necessarily have technical background. Right? So sometimes, depending on the audience that I’m targeting, I’m always very, very peculiar on what is my target audience, right? How can I—how deep in my technical knowledge do I need to go? Because if I just, you know, talk straight Engineer, they either don’t care or they’re gonna be really confused about what I’m saying. So there is a stronghold of soft skills that definitely go into engineering, which I think are really important to communicate, you know, to, let’s say, students that are really interested in engineering. So you can be extremely smart and intelligent and really good at problem-solving, but if you don’t have those soft skills that you apply in the real world—’cause in the real world, you’re never only gonna be working with engineers, no matter like where you’re at—so having those soft skills to be able to manage with different backgrounds and different sort of people and different ways of thinking, it’s, I feel, really critical, for, for an engineer in the real world.

Eric Cross (13:50):

No, I think that’s a great point. It reminds me of teaching! And so many other professions where your ultimate goal is to really pour into this person in front of you and help develop them and create a sense of inquiry and wonder and personal growth and inspiration. But you’re also working within constraints and people and relationships. You know, you have your other teachers, you have parents, you have administrators, you have a district, you have communities, stakeholders. You have all of these different dynamics that you have to kind of navigate in order to ultimately help this child thrive. Versus just, like, being in the classroom: “OK, I just got <laugh>, the hundred or 200 students, just you and me. That’s it.” But that’s not the real world. And there’s this report that came out, I think Google ran it, Project Oxygen and Project Aristotle, and they asked the question, “What are the most effective traits of a good team and a manager?” And the top seven skills were all soft skills. So it is like exactly what you’re saying, where, yeah, it’s great that you have this technical aptitude, but if you’re not able to work with other people, problem-solve together, work with people of different backgrounds and perspectives, then you’re gonna run into some roadblocks. And that kind of dovetails, like, looking at things like if you looked at education from the perspective of an engineer. So you’re all about optimizing, right? Optimizing, working with what you got. When you look at education, are there any things that you would optimize to help improve the experience of students? Like, looking back, that you would fine-tune, that you think could provide better outcomes in the classroom?

Juan Vivas (15:28):

You know, I feel…I don’t know. Obviously I’m not a teacher. And I’m sure teachers just have so much stuff going on. But I think just like, finding…giving a chance to those students that you see a lot of potential in and really taking the time to mold them. You know, I did have a teacher who was able to mold me and give me that kind of one-on-one personal experience, right? I think honestly to me it just comes down to mentorship, and motivating students on what, you know, they’re passionate for. Like, putting them in front of engineers, right? Like finding engineers to come volunteer and explain to them. I genuinely believe it just takes one spark to really get a student on a trajectory where they can make an impact in the future. So to me, it comes down to, really, exposure. How much are you really exposing your students to…you know what, something I’ve learned, when I joined SpaceX, is that Elon doesn’t believe—well, you know, there there’s a lot of things that Elon believes and not believes in; there’s a whole different type of conversation!—but he doesn’t think that you can just take a curriculum, let’s say, and just apply it massively to everyone and expect like everyone to be it. That’s just naturally not how it works, right? Students learn at different paces; they have different sort of interests. This is actually why he created his own school for his kids in LA, called Ad Astra. You know, if you take that mentality, what that school is doing is that they’re working at the students’ pace and at the student’s interests, right? And I actually have a coworker who has his kids in that school. And I mean, these are one of the most brilliant kids I’ve ever known. Like, they are taking differential equations in the eighth grade. And I didn’t know what differential equations was until I was in college already and they told me, “This is a class you have to take.” <Laugh>. But it’s finding that crossway where, where is the curiosity of the student? What are they really interested in? and exposing them to that.

Eric Cross (17:51):

Yeah. And what I’m hearing of that is, in teacher-speak, a lot of personalized learning. Like you were talking about…is it Ad Astra?

Juan Vivas (17:59):

Ad Astra? Yep.

Eric Cross (18:01):

Ad Astra. You know, every student learns in their own way and they develop knowledge in their own way. And being able to personalize learning according to the students’ abilities and needs, and then accelerate or slow down, really produces some amazing effects. I know this is something that we as teachers try to do with the classroom. Scaling it is the challenge. But it’s great because even with people who are in charge of policy or people who have decision-making ability, hearing people from the top down saying, “Hey, look, this is what worked for me. This is how I was able to become successful. I had a teacher that was able to be a mentor to me because they knew me, they had a relationship with me, they were able to tap into my passions and use those passions to drive me to do or put me in programs that I might not have known about because they, they knew who I was.” And it’s not one-size-fits-all for everyone. So having—maybe it’s curriculum or learning experiences that are kind of modular, where students are able to maybe try on different things and get that exposure, I’m a big, big believer, like you are, in mentorship. That was a huge, huge thing in my life. Having mentors. It’s the reason why I became a science teacher. In seventh grade, I had a mentor who had us doing college-level science, you know, at UC San Diego. And it completely changed the trajectory of my life, in a direction that I wouldn’t have had without him. So I think that’s great. And it’s something that we as teachers would appreciate hearing. Going back to what you said…earlier you said your wife is a supply chain engineer as well. And so that means that there’s two people who are process-minded in the household. And this is kind of a lighter question, but I gotta wonder, do you have the most optimized flow for grocery shopping? <Laugh> Because…

Juan Vivas (19:49):

Yeah, I think we don’t spend more than like 20 minutes at a grocery store. Mind you, we only shop at Trader Joe’s and we have a very specific list before going in. And if you ever shop at Trader Joe’s, you just know where everything is ’cause it’s always there and it’s small, right? But yeah, like we’re, we’re in and out in like 15, 20 minutes. It’s great.

Eric Cross (20:11):

I love it. I love it. I feel like I’m that way by design. I go in with a purpose and this is exactly what I want. I know where the cookie butter is, <laugh>, I know where my coffee is, and then, OK, I’m in and out. Apple Pay or whatever I’m using. And then we’re good to go. Do you think…so as someone listening to this or some people even just becoming aware of supply chain engineering, what advice would you give someone that’s interested in pursuing this career path? If you maybe reverse-engineered your process, knowing what you know now, you were gonna give advice, you were that mentor, what are just some kind of tips or ideas or thoughts or trajectories that you’d think that they should aim for? I’m assuming like robotics….

Juan Vivas (20:56):

Yeah. You know, I think I would say definitely finding some sort of program that exposes you to a lot of things that you won’t be exposed to, like on a day-to-day basis, or something that you just can’t be exposed to naturally at school. And mentorship, honestly. I was born in Colombia and my parents were both—they’re still both professionals, but they were both professionals in Colombia. And when we moved to this country, this was like December of 1999. My parents started from scratch, and so they didn’t really grow up in the States, right? So when it was my time to go to college and do all of this stuff, it was just like me on my own figuring this stuff out. And, you know, they definitely made some mistakes when it came to college applications and whatnot. But once I was in college, I knew that the best way for my success was gonna be through mentorship. And that’s when I joined the, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, which is a nationwide organization. And each college, well, most college campuses, have their own chapter. In joining that, I was exposed to resume workshops, mock interviews—basically how do you even talk to a recruiter? Which is so critical, right? And personally that that organization was really what molded my actual professional career.

Eric Cross (22:19):

There’s this theme that I’m hearing, kind of weaving through this. And in addition to—as we’re talking about STEM and technical skills, in addition to that, there’s this thread that I’m receiving of…being able to form relationships with other people, for our students, is an important skill to teach and should be taught explicitly. Which isn’t…it’s not really a curriculum, right? Like, you don’t get tested on your ability to….conflict resolution or how to write an email or how to develop a relationship. And then the other part in I think what you just said is the aspect of community. Through this organization, you learned kind of some of these hidden rules, maybe I would call it.

Juan Vivas (23:04):

Yep.

Eric Cross (23:04):

It’s not that you didn’t have the…you had the aptitude. You had the drive. But there were these kind of hidden rules, and from moving to the US, you needed a community to be able to show you, so that you can kind of go through the proper steps.

Juan Vivas (23:16):

Exactly.

Eric Cross (23:17):

And so that created a lot of value for you.

Juan Vivas (23:19):

Yep.

Eric Cross (23:20):

Well, the last question that I have is, is just kind of a wondering. You have this awesome story, and the story continues to unfold. I gotta say, <laugh> I’m gonna be following your LinkedIn profile, because I think you just have kind of the coolest trajectory of going from, you know, General Mills, working in chemical engineering, and then ultimately it’s SpaceX. And every time I see the rocket taking off and landing, I’m gonna be thinking, thinking about you. So cool!

Juan Vivas (23:47):

Yeah. Yeah.

Eric Cross (23:49):

And personally, I have a hope that one day, one of my students will be at a company, you know, like SpaceX or Tesla or wherever, and one day I get to interview them and talk to them and see what they say. But the last question I want to ask is, is there, is there a teacher who inspired you, or a memorable experience that you have that made an impact on you?

Juan Vivas (24:16):

Yeah, yeah, of course. It was kind of you know, middle school going into high school. The way my school worked, everything was divided from pre-kindergarten, whatever, first to sixth grade, and then seventh grade to 12th grade. So I had a high school science teacher, Ms. Brown, Ms. Velda Brown, who, came from a small little island town on the east coast of Canada. Somehow landed, in the high school that I went to, to teach science. Going back to the beginning of the story where I mentioned that I figured whatever, I’ll go to med school. I played soccer, basketball, and, you know, I said, “I’ll figure it out once I graduate.” It might have been like life science in the eighth grade or something like that. But then she went on to teach me chemistry and physics as well. And when I was in the 10th grade, she approached me and she asked me if I wanted to join the robotics club. And I remember saying robotics? I don’t know. You know, naturally, in school, it’s different sorts of crowds: people that play sports and people that are like in like STEM clubs or whatever. And I was, “Ah, I don’t know; I don’t know how I feel about robotics; not really my thing….” But somehow she convinced me to join robotics. It’s me, coming into this group of kids that already knew each other, and they were all working on robotics. And I’m, “Yeah, I mean, I guess I’m just here to try this thing out.” It was a thing where we met every single Saturday at like seven in the morning. And there were times where I literally had to choose, “Do I go to like a soccer game or do I go to you help my team with robotics?” And I completely loved it. Like, I fell in love with the aspect of building something from scratch, and just making it operative. And she ended up just being a huge mentor for me in high school, actually. With her, with the help of her, I ended up opening the robotics club at my school. And before I left, we opened it up to middle schoolers. And then, you know, later, years later down the road when I was in college, I found out that it was now a whole-school thing. So there was an elementary robotics club at the school, the middle school one, and then the high school one were still a thing like years after I left. And that was like just so amazing to hear. But yeah, it was Ms. Velda Brown, my high school science teacher, that really took her time to mold me and get me into robotics, and really mentor me. And honestly, I’m sure you as teachers, you guys probably hear about it a lot, but you can have a lot of power in shaping a kid by just telling—believing in them, right? She believed in me so much that I would go on to be a successful engineer. And I’m. “OK, yeah, yeah, you’re just saying it.” But she spoke life into her students up to this day. I still speak about it with my wife, and when I’m in conversations about this, that if it wasn’t for my high school science teacher, I would not—well, no, I would probably not be an engineer right now.

Eric Cross (27:38):

Wow. Shout out to Ms. Velda Brown <laugh>. Would you say she spoke…I think one thing that just resonated with me is when you said she “spoke life” into you.

Juan Vivas (27:46):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (27:46):

That was really powerful. And I think we as teachers have that power and we don’t realize it. Because, you know, we get so we’re so familiar and living day-to-day, but we do have the power of life, speaking life, into our young people. And, yeah, that was—

Juan Vivas (28:03):

Absolutely, yeah. You know, I think obviously people grew up with different backgrounds, different communities, life situations, right? So imagine having like a student that is similar in that environment and then they just hear someone at their school, like, “Hey, you’re really good at this. why don’t you consider doing this?” And that’s when I feel teachers have that power. Where like they don’t necessarily know the background, but they can make that opportunity, or make that decision in the moment, to really shape a student’s life.

Eric Cross (28:37):

And we need to hear that. And I think, I hope that other teachers listening to this will be reminded that many times we don’t get to reap the harvest. We don’t get to see the <laugh> Juan Vivases at SpaceX. They just kind of go, and they disappear, and we hope for the best, and we get a new group. But every once in a while they come back, and we get to see what our watering or seed-planting was able to produce. And so, just know that you sharing your story for educators, and for definitely Ms. Brown, makes a huge difference and is a huge encouragement. So.

Juan Vivas (29:11):

You know, I think we touched on earlier, you know, how do I end up going from cereal to rockets, right? And I think it ties along with what I mentioned earlier of just taking—as an engineer, you’re really a critical problem solver, right? And you think that methodology. And if you find a way, you can apply it to different sectors. When I was doing a lot of like the packaging process stuff at General Mills, being a lead on a high-volume manufacturing line, what I do for SpaceX specifically, right now, I’m actually on the Starlink project. So if you’re up to date with Starlink, it’s, it’s essentially high reliable, fast internet that we’re providing to areas where usually people don’t have access to internet, right? Or maybe they do, but it’s extremely expensive. Because to an internet provider company, the benefit is not there, if they extend an entire internet fiber line out to their place because it’s only directed to them, right? So that’s, that’s essentially what Starlink is trying to solve. And this is the first time that SpaceX is facing a consumer packaging scenario. Before it was just rockets. And now they’re selling a product to consumers. They had never done that before, especially in a high-volume manufacturing setting. And so I am the supplier development engineer for all the consumer-facing packaging for the Starlink product itself. And that’s essentially how all those thoughts connected, where I had this experience coming from General Mills and packaging high-volume manufacturing. And then when Starlink started, they’re all, “Right, well, who knows anything about packaging?” Right? “We know so much about rockets, we need someone with this technical background.” And that’s essentially how I bridge over to SpaceX.

Eric Cross (31:11):

And so while you’re working at SpaceX, you’re working on Starlink, which I know you mentioned that—you said that it’s providing internet globally, which in and of itself, we—especially those of us that live in major cities—we kind of take for granted. Internet is like a utility. But we don’t maybe realize that in many parts of the world, internet is not reliable or even accessible.

Juan Vivas (31:33):

Right. Right.

Eric Cross (31:34):

I see every once in a while, I think, the StarlinK satellites sometimes are visible?

Juan Vivas (31:38):

Yep.

Eric Cross (31:39):

Low orbit?

Juan Vivas (31:39):

Yeah. Yeah. You can go—they’ll kind of be like a little train of bright stars that move along together. Yep.

Eric Cross (31:46):

And that must—that must feel…I mean, we all have jobs and we’re all doing different things, but you’re working on a project and you’re engineering something that actually can provide a lot of opportunities or close a gap in some parts of the world where they don’t have access to internet. They’re gonna be able to have access and be connected all over. I dunno, the word would be “existential.” Existential value. Like, what you’re doing is actually providing a service for people. Humanity. Like, addressing a critical need in many, many places around the world.

Juan Vivas (32:26):

Yeah. We’ve had stories where we have sent Starlink kids to a small school in a village in rural Chile, right in South America. And for the first time ever, they’ve had internet. We have supported disaster relief in Europe. I think this past summer, Europe had really bad floods. We sent Starlink kits out there. You know, the vision of working at an Elon Musk company and SpaceX and Starlink—this is all stuff that is being done for the first time in history. We have never, ever done anything like this before until now. And to be able to provide those that don’t have the access to—to your point, it’s kind of wild, right? Like we, we just take it for granted. “Oh yeah, I just have internet. Let me log on.” There are people on Earth right now that have never been on the internet. Or don’t even know what the internet is. And that’s essentially the, the gap that Startlink is starting to close.

Eric Cross (33:26):

Yeah. We think about that while my students are doing TikTok dances. <Laugh> And there are people who, you know, never, never been connected. And, it kind of makes me more like, just inside, if I can ask: What’s it like working at SpaceX? I showed my students what it’s like working at some of the Silicon Valley companies. ‘Cause just to show them there’s slides and food and, you know, they kind developed this ecosystem inside so that it’s really kind of homey to kind of keep you there, you know. When you’re working and there’s bikes and things like that. And that’s a very Silicon Valley type of thing. But, you know, in listening to you talk about SpaceX and Elon, you know, you’re with a really visionary kind of company, and when I hear you talk about it, there’s I can hear this passion, this, “we’re doing something.” Is that culture, like, pervasive everywhere? Are you around folks that kind of are on that same wavelength? Because I definitely get it from you as you talk about what you do.

Juan Vivas (34:28):

Yeah, yeah. Definitely. I think, as an engineer, you know, going to SpaceX and working at SpaceX, it’s essentially—personally, I believe right now in the US it’s like the mecca of engineering, right? Like, it is where engineering in this most, you know, shape and manner, it’s being applied. I think what’s really interesting is that the way that Elon looks at it is just iterate, and iterate fast, right? Like, fail and fail fast. I think as an engineer, you always want to have things perfect, right? And so you spend a lot of time in making a decision or investigating something or whatever. And working at SpaceX is the complete opposite. It’s just you know, “Assume, state your assumptions—like, what are you assuming right now? What are the risk at it? And just make a decision and then see what the result is.” You know, so it’s an environment where you learn, really quick.

Eric Cross (35:28):

You said something that I think was powerful and I hope, I think <laugh>, this is definitely, I’m gonna get a clip of this <laugh> of you saying it. Because it speaks directly to, I think, what a lot of students struggle with in the classroom, is there’s this competition or feeling that you always need to be right. And you need to be right the first try, on the first time. And a lot of times it’s because students will compare themselves to each other, or there’s a tremendous amount of pressure to be successful. But you said, “Fail and fail fast, iterate, state your assumptions.” And it sounds like this critical part of being an engineer or in what you do, like there’s no room for ego or attaching your identity or your sense of value or worth or ability to whether you’re able to solve a problem in the first try.

Juan Vivas (36:13):

Yep.

Eric Cross (36:14):

Like, you have to be OK with the cycle, is kind of what I’m hearing from you. Is that, is that right?

Juan Vivas (36:19):

Yep. Exactly. It only took six months to develop the product from scratch and launch it to the public, which is insane. Nowhere in the world will any company ever iterate that fast and come up with a brand-new project. But it’s because of that mentality—like you’re saying, it’s not about like just trying to make it perfect and have all this information. And I think Elon has learned this personally, you know, through Tesla and the beginning of SpaceX. It’s, “I can wait to have all this information, and most likely I’m still gonna be wrong after I make the decision.” So it’s, “Might as well take the risk, do the decision, and then just see where you learn from it, right?” And then you keep applying that, applying that. So it’s like you iterate, iterate, iterate, iterate until you get what you want.

Eric Cross (37:00):

I think this is even, like, great advice. I’m taking this personally because I get paralysis by analysis <laugh>.

Juan Vivas (37:06):

Yep.

Eric Cross (37:07):

You know, I’ll research something to death but then not actually execute. Like, I need to make a decision and do it and then course-correct along the way. Somebody once told me it’s a lot easier to turn a moving car than it is a car that’s sitting still. And so as you’re kind of flowing, you’re just making these adjustments along the way until you end up on the path that you want to be. So I think that there’s so many gems in the things that you’re saying right now. What I’m thinking through the lens of my seventh graders that want to work in any STEM field—I mean, really, any field in general, but especially engineering, especially the STEM fields—knowing that, pick it, make a decision, move forward, and then course-correct along the way. That’s what science looks like in the real world.

Juan Vivas (37:49):

Yep. Exactly. Yep. And definitely most important—and I feel like this is sometimes where, not necessarily education in general, but it’s just, we want students to, “OK, you need to get it right the perfect time, right?” But it’s like, every student is gonna think differently. A student is gonna take a different assumption based on their background and experiences. And I mean, you know, we can go a lot deeper in that, but the way a student is shaped, they’re gonna take certain assumptions. So that’s where it gets interesting. OK, why are you assuming that? Where’s your thought process in this?

Eric Cross (38:25):

And we all come from different backgrounds and mindsets and filters and biases that cause us to look at something a certain way. And it’s not just like calling it out, just going, “Hey look, this is what it is.” Like autopsy without blame, this is what I’m working with. Let’s discuss it openly. Right? And if we started that process earlier, you know, younger, in classrooms, we can de-stigmatize the right answer being the best answer more, as opposed to focusing on process as opposed to outcome. And then you kinda get used to wanting to go through the process. I look at it like video games and I talk to my students. I say, “You know, you don’t pick up a video game that’s brand-new and then play it and then you die once and you’re ‘Ah, I’m never gonna play this game again.’ You know, it just doesn’t work that way. You’re going through this iterative process, and no matter what you play, you’re trying things differently. You’re data collecting. And then you’re making new decisions based on the data that you collected.” And for some of my kids, they’ll just raise their hands, say, “No, I just get mad and throw the controller across the room.” <Laugh> But I go, “Yeah, and then you’ll try it again.”

Juan Vivas (39:33):

The best way to know how not to do something is to fail. And so you already…I mean, what is that famous quote? I think that’s why Thomas Edison’s, “Oh, I, did not fail 99 times. Right? I only found 99 times…” I mean, that is that is true. And I feel like at work in a SpaceX, that is something that probably the core of it comes from there. It’s you know, any failure, quote unquote, that you may take it as a failure, it’s really not. You’re just “OK, we, we tried that. It didn’t work. Like what are we gonna do next?” So it’s just like taking that learning and like moving off with it quickly.

Eric Cross (40:09):

I heard a couple of teachers say, “Things fail: First Attempt In Learning: F A I L.” And then another teacher, one of my mentor teachers, she said, “There’s no such thing as failure, just data, in science.”

Juan Vivas (40:20):

Mm-hmm. <affirmative>. Exactly. Yep.

Eric Cross (40:23):

And so I’ve always taken that to heart. And I share that with my own students, just, “A ‘no,’ a lot of times, will tell you more information than a ‘yes.’” ‘Cause if something works in the first try, you may not exactly know why it worked. It just did.

Juan Vivas (40:34):

Yeah. Yep.

Eric Cross (40:37):

So yeah. Well, I went on your time, brother. Dude. <laugh>. The time flew. It was…

Juan Vivas (40:46):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (40:47):

There were so many things I was trying to write out as you were talking, that I just felt like, “This guy is sharing so many gems!” But yeah, I want to thank you for taking time outta your day and for sharing that information for your passion for what you do. And, I don’t know, I think that students and teachers that listen to this will get an insight from a perspective that really matters. ‘Cause ultimately we’re, we’re trying to really prepare our students for real life. Maybe I’ll email you privately if I order a Tesla, if you can move me higher up the Cybertruck line. <laugh>

Juan Vivas (41:22):

Yeah. No promises.

Eric Cross (41:24):

<laugh>

Juan Vivas (41:25):

Yeah. No, I appreciate you guys having me, having me here, and be able to speak on my experience. And hopefully it sparks a couple, one, even if it’s just one teacher that will spark another student, that is already success there. So.

Eric Cross (41:42):

Well I know, I know what you said resonates with me and it fills my cup. And I’m excited. So I’m already thinking of some ideas of things that I can do, just because of this conversation, and I know other people will as well. And, again, this is Juan Vivas, who’s a supply development engineer at SpaceX. He’s worked at some amazing places. And someone who believes deeply in not only the power of the technical skills, but the heart skills, and how community makes a huge impact in his life. It made a huge impact in him ultimately becoming a scientist, and now working on a project at SpaceX, Starlink, that is going to provide access to the world, to the web. And that’ll ultimately help us solve more problems and innovate and create some solutions that will benefit everybody. Thank you, sir. Appreciate you.

Juan Vivas (42:30):

Yeah, thank you. Thank you so much, Eric. Appreciate it.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Juan Vivas says about engineering

“Based on my experience so far, I think the best way to put it… an engineer is a technical problem solver.”

– Juan Vivas

Supplier development engineer, SpaceX

Meet the guest

Juan Vivas is a chemical engineer currently working as a Supplier Development Engineer at SpaceX. Juan got his start at the University of Florida, where he led the Society of Hispanic Engineers (SHPE) as vice president. He’s worked for companies like Clorox, Dow Chemical, and General Mills. Juan lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife and two dogs.

Man in a suit and tie smiling at the camera with a blurred green background.

About Science Connections: The podcast

Welcome to Science Connections: The Podcast! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher.