[Senate Hearing 111-985]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-985
NOMINATION OF CARL E. WIEMAN, Ph.D.,
TO BE ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR SCIENCE,
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 20, 2010
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
66-488 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas,
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts Ranking
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
BILL NELSON, Florida JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas GEORGE S. LeMIEUX, Florida
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
TOM UDALL, New Mexico SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
MARK WARNER, Virginia MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
MARK BEGICH, Alaska
Ellen L. Doneski, Staff Director
James Reid, Deputy Staff Director
Bruce H. Andrews, General Counsel
Ann Begeman, Republican Staff Director
Brian M. Hendricks, Republican General Counsel
Nick Rossi, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 20, 2010..................................... 1
Statement of Senator Pryor....................................... 1
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 3
Witnesses
Hon. Mark Udall, U.S. Senator from Colorado...................... 2
Carl E. Wieman, Ph.D., Associate Director-Designate for Science,
Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of
the President.................................................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Biographical information..................................... 6
Appendix
Hon. Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator from Florida, prepared statement.. 31
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Carl E. Wieman, Ph.D........................................... 31
NOMINATION OF CARL E. WIEMAN, Ph.D.,
TO BE ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR SCIENCE,
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
POLICY, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 20, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:53 p.m. in room
SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Pryor,
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK PRYOR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS
Senator Pryor. I'll go ahead and call this hearing to
order. I welcome everyone to this meeting of the Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation, and specifically to the
nomination hearing of Dr. Carl Wieman, to be Associate Director
for Science of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
I'd like to welcome our nominee. Today we'll consider his
nomination. There are some Senators who I know will not be in
attendance today. So what we'll do is we'll leave the record
open for a few days for those Senators who would like to submit
questions.
The OSTP can have up to four Presidentially-appointed,
Senate-confirmed associate directors. If confirmed, Dr. Wieman
will be responsible for coordinating, monitoring, and advising
on national research priorities and inter-agency programs
within OSTP's portfolio. According to OSTP Director Dr.
Holdren, the Associate Director for Science will oversee STEM
education activities and he will act as an expert adviser to
the OSTP Director.
The OSTP is a critical arm of the White House. The advisers
offer timely technical counsel to the President and his senior
staff on significant policy matters. Staff members inform good
policy through sound science and coordinate among science and
technology-related agencies.
Finally, the OSTP strives to make sure Americans' financial
investments make the best possible contribution to our
collective prosperity, public health, national security, and
environmental quality.
Dr. Carl Wieman has extensive teaching experience, has
received numerous awards, and has conducted extensive research
in atomic and laser physics. Currently, he serves as Professor
of Physics and Director of Collaborative Science Education
Initiatives at both the University of British Columbia and the
University of Colorado. From 1984 through 2006, he was a
Distinguished Professor of Physics and Presidential Teaching
Scholar at the University of Colorado. Notably, he shared the
Nobel Prize in Physics and 2001 for the creation of the Bose-
Einstein condensation, a new form of matter that I'm sure we'll
ask about in a few minutes so we can try to understand what
that means.
Dr. Wieman was the founding Chair of the National Academy
of Sciences Board on Science Education. Distinguished
institutions have conferred on him numerous prestigious awards,
including the National Science Foundation's Distinguished
Teacher-Scholar Award in 2001, the Carnegie Foundation's U.S.
University Professor of the Year Award in 2004, and the
American Association of Physics Teachers Hoersted Medal in
2007.
We look forward to hearing Dr. Wieman's statement and
examining his credentials for this important post. But first,
we have a friend and guest of the Committee here to introduce
Dr. Wieman, and it is Senator Mark Udall from Colorado. Senator
Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Mark Udall. Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me
an opportunity to add additional comments to the wonderful
introduction you just made of Dr. Wieman. I've known Carl for a
number of years through his work as a Professor of Physics and
a Presidential Teaching Scholar at the University of Colorado.
He was born in Oregon, Mr. Chairman, but we're proud to claim
him as a Coloradan. He is, as you pointed out, the President's
nominee to be the Associate Director for Science at the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
I'm deeply pleased that President Obama recognizes the
talent and creativity that Carl will bring to our discussions
on science and in particular STEM education. You mentioned that
Dr. Wieman won the 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics for producing a
new state of matter called the Bose-Einstein condensate. I once
asked him, can you see it, and you should maybe perhaps ask him
that during his testimony.
I also know in front of the Committee recently you had two
Apollo astronauts, including the first human to walk on the
Moon, Neil Armstrong, who's an iconic figure to all of us.
While no doubt this is a remarkable achievement, I would note
that 12 men have walked on the Moon. How many people, however,
can say they've created a new state of matter?
Interestingly enough, Carl's Nobel Prize-winning work built
upon earlier work in laser cooling by the other Nobel Prize
winner in President Obama's Administration, Secretary of
Energy, Steven Chu.
While Dr. Wieman is most famous for winning the Nobel
Prize, it is his commitment to teaching science to others that
is Carl's most remarkable quality in my eyes. He's an expert
not just in teaching science, but in improving how it is
actually taught. He has devoted his entire professional life to
STEM education. He's currently the Director of the Carl Wieman
Science Education Initiative and, as you mentioned, still
spends part of his time at the University of Colorado leading
the science education initiative that he founded.
He was a founding Chair of the National Academy of Sciences
Board on Science Education and he has won many accolades for
his teaching.
Mr. Chairman, if we as the United States are going to
continue to be a global leader, if we're going to remain
economically competitive with other nations, we need to teach
our children math and science and we need to cultivate the next
generation of scientists and engineers. Currently, it's no
secret that we're falling behind in that regard.
Carl knows better than anyone how to improve STEM
education. That skill and his experience will be an invaluable
addition to the Obama Administration. I hope and trust and urge
you to approve his nomination and I encourage you to move
consideration to the Senate floor in an expeditious manner.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
appear before your committee, and I would note one final fact,
that it takes two Udalls to handle one Pryor. Thank you for
giving me the chance to introduce Dr. Wieman today.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Senator Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Tom Udall. I want to make sure we don't let this
witness leave without asking him some tough questions.
Senator Mark Udall. I agree with that.
[Laughter.]
Senator Pryor. We've got him under oath now. We'll take
care of him.
Good. Thank you, Senator Udall. We appreciate it.
Senator Udall, did you have an opening statement?
Senator Tom Udall. No, just go on. I'm here to hear his
testimony and ask some questions.
Senator Pryor. Sure, great.
Dr. Wieman, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF CARL E. WIEMAN, Ph.D.
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR-DESIGNATE FOR SCIENCE,
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
Dr. Wieman. Thank you, Mark, for that generous
introduction.
Chairman Pryor, Senator Udall, and distinguished members of
this committee: It's a great honor to appear before you today.
I'm grateful for President Obama's confidence in nominating me
to be Associate Director for Science in the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy. OSTP's science portfolio is
remarkably broad and I appreciate the work of this committee in
addressing many of those issues and, if confirmed, I look
forward to working with all of you.
I grew up deep in the forests of Oregon and I can still
remember first getting on the school bus and riding many miles
over unpaved roads to attend first grade. I never imagined that
was the first step on a journey that would lead me to sitting
before you today to discuss my nomination.
My early education was in a tiny school in rural Oregon and
was greatly supplemented by reading many books from the public
library in the distant town of Corvallis. For middle and high
school, my family relocated to Corvallis, the home of Oregon
State University, to allow me and my siblings to attend a
better school system. After completing high school, getting on
an airplane for the first time to go off to college to MIT was
another big step on my journey to sitting here today before
you.
I nearly failed my first physics class at MIT, but I was
fortunate enough to have the opportunity to work in a physics
research lab. There I discovered that doing science was far
more rewarding than studying about science. My work in the lab
became a consuming passion and gave me a superb education. I
became fascinated with what one could learn from blasting atoms
with light from a new type of laser, and I saw this as an
exciting unexplored territory.
Exploring that territory led me to graduate work at
Stanford University and ultimately to a long and successful
career of physics at the University of Colorado. I feel that my
strengths as a scientist are recognizing opportunities a little
earlier and working a bit harder than others, and being able to
build things that have unique capabilities, usually while held
together with duct tape and costing a fraction of the price of
the competition. All these talents may prove useful in
government service should I be confirmed.
I've also devoted much of my career to the issue of science
education. As a young assistant professor, I approached
teaching, as most firsts do, figuring out the subject to be
taught very clearly in my own mind and then explaining it to
the students, expecting they would understand it the way I did.
However, when I actually measured what my students were
learning carefully, I discovered that what I thought was clear
and simple the students found incomprehensible, and I was quite
puzzled and frustrated by this result.
That experience actually led me to what's now been nearly a
20-year effort of mine to understand how people learn science
and how to teach it more effectively. I have conducted
extensive research in this area and I have worked with a number
of groups, particularly the National Academy of Sciences, who
share my interest in improving science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics--that's STEM--education.
This effort has led me to understand both my early failings
as a teacher, but also how I and others can teach science much
more effectively. This is very important because our global
economy is increasingly based around science and technology. To
maintain U.S. economic competitiveness and leadership in
innovation, we need to also have leadership in STEM education.
This will both enhance the scientific and engineering workforce
and the technical literacy of all our citizens, providing them
with complex problem-solving skills that they can use in many
aspects of their jobs and lives.
President Obama has assembled an exceptional scientific
team, including Energy Secretary Chu, who has been a friend of
mine for decades and first talked to me about the importance of
government service, and OSTP Director John Holdren, and I look
forward to the opportunity to work with them as well as members
of this committee and this Congress to develop effective and
efficient programs that will maintain our leadership in
scientific research, to measure the results of our investments
in this area, and to greatly improve STEM education.
If confirmed, I hope to use my scientific background as
well as my experience in STEM education to deepen science
policy dialogue and to enhance progress in STEM education in
this country.
I'm pleased to try and answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement and biographical information of Dr.
Wieman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Carl E. Wieman, Ph.D., Associate Director-
Designate for Science, Office of Science and Technology Policy,
Executive Office of the President
Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Hutchison, and distinguished
members of this Committee, it is a great honor to appear before you
today. I am grateful for President Obama's confidence in nominating me
to be the Associate Director for Science in the White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
OSTP's science portfolio is remarkably broad, and I appreciate the
work of this Committee in addressing many of those issues. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with all of you.
I grew up deep in the forests of Oregon. I can still remember first
getting on the school bus and riding it many miles over unpaved roads
to attend first grade. I never imagined that was the first step on a
journey that would lead me to sitting before you today to discuss my
nomination.
My early education was in a tiny school in rural Oregon and was
greatly supplemented by reading many books from the public library in
the distant town of Corvallis. For middle and high school, my family
relocated to Corvallis, the home of Oregon State University, to allow
me and my siblings to attend a better school system. After completing
high school, getting on an airplane for the first time to go off to
college at MIT was another big step on my journey to sitting here
today.
I nearly failed my first physics course at MIT, but I was fortunate
enough to have the opportunity to work in a physics research
laboratory. I discovered that doing science was far more rewarding than
studying about science. My work in the lab became a consuming passion
and gave me a superb education. I became fascinated with what one could
learn from blasting atoms with light from a new type of laser, and I
saw this as opening up an exciting unexplored territory.
That exploration led me to graduate work at Stanford University and
ultimately to a long and successful career as a professor of physics at
the University of Colorado. I feel that my strengths as a scientist are
recognizing opportunities earlier and working a bit harder than others,
and being able to build things that have unique capabilities, usually
while held together with duct tape and costing a fraction of the price
of the competition. These talents may all prove useful in government
service, should I be confirmed.
I have also devoted much of my career to the issue of science
education. As a young assistant professor, I approached teaching as
most do, figuring out the subject to be taught clearly in my own mind
and then explaining it to the students--expecting that they would then
understand it as I did. However, when I measured what my students were
learning I discovered that what I thought was clear and simple, the
students found incomprehensible. I was puzzled and frustrated by this
result.
That experience led to what has now been a nearly 20 year effort of
mine to understand how people learn science and how to teach it more
effectively. I have conducted research and worked with a number of
groups, particularly the National Academy of Sciences, who share my
interests in improving science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) education. This has led me to understand both my
early failings as a teacher and how I and others can teach science more
effectively.
Our global economy is increasingly based on science and technology.
To maintain U.S. economic competitiveness and leadership in innovation,
we need to also have leadership in STEM education. This will both
enhance the scientific and engineering workforce and the technical
literacy of all our citizens, providing them with complex problem-
solving skills they can use in many aspects of their jobs and lives.
President Obama has assembled an exceptional scientific team,
including Energy Secretary Chu, who has been a friend for decades and
first talked to me about the importance of government service, and OSTP
Director, Dr. Holdren. I look forward to the opportunity to work with
them, as well as the members of this committee and this Congress, to
develop effective and efficient programs that will maintain our
leadership in scientific research, to measure results of our
investments in this area, and to greatly improve STEM education. If
confirmed, I hope to use my scientific background, as well as my
experience in STEM education, to deepen the science policy dialogue and
to enhance progress in STEM education in this country.
I am pleased to try to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you.
______
a. biographical information
1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Carl Edwin
Wieman.
2. Position to which nominated: Associate Director for Science,
OSTP.
3. Date of Nomination: March 24, 2010.
4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):
Residence: Information not available to the public.
Office: Wesbrook Building #300, 6174 University Blvd, Vancouver
BC V6T 1Z3, Canada.
5. Date and Place of Birth: 3/26/51; Corvallis, Oregon.
6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including
stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).
Sarah L. Gilbert, Associate Director, Carl Wieman Science
Education Initiative, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, BC.
7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school
attended.
B.S. in Physics, 1973 MIT.
Ph.D. in Physics, 1977, Stanford University.
8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all
management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
the position for which you are nominated. All positions involve
scientific research and science education, and hence relate to the
position for which I am nominated.
Assistant Research Scientist, Department of Physics, University
of Michigan, 1977-1979.
Assistant Professor of Physics, University of Michigan, 1979-
84.
Associate Professor of Physics, University of Colorado, 1984-
87.
Fellow, JILA, 1985 to present.
Professor of Physics, University of Colorado, 1987-1997.
Chair, JILA, 1993-1995. JILA is highly successful 250+ person
interdisciplinary research institute. From 1990 until 2006 I
was the Principal Investigator for the JILA NSF center grant,
which was by far the largest single grant of the institute and
a large fraction of its total funding, and so I was the de
facto, although unofficial, head during that period.
Distinguished Professor, University of Colorado, 1997 to
present.
Director, Science Education Initiative, University of Colorado,
12/2005 to present.
Professor of Physics, University of British Columbia, 2007 to
present.
Director, Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative, University
of British Columbia, 2007 to present.
9. Attach a copy of your resume. A copy is attached.
10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
than those listed above, within the last 5 years.
Colorado blue ribbon panel on high school-college alignment 2005.
I was the founding Chair of the National Academy of Science/
National Research Council, Board on Science Education 1995 to 2009, and
I continue to serve on that Board as a member. This Board was
frequently called upon by the Federal Government to provide
consultation and objective guidance on science education.
11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
educational, or other institution within the last 5 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Math Science Serve on the Nonprofit 4/09 to
Initiative Board of advancing math present
Dallas, Texas Directors. and science
education
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research Corporation Serve on the Nonprofit 11/08 to
for Science Advisory Board. foundation present
Advancement supporting
Tucson, AZ science
research and
education
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Center for Excellence Chair the Center at a 4/09 to
in Math and Science International university present
Education of King Advisory Board. devoted to
Saud University, King improving math
Saud University and science
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia education in
Saudi Arabia
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Physical Chair of the Physics 6/05 to
Society Editorial Professional present
American Center for Advisory Board and Educational
Physics of ``Physics Society
College Park, MD Review: Physics
Education
Research'' of
the American
Physical Society
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Please list each membership you have had during the past 10
years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable,
educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or
religious organization, private club, or other membership organization.
Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any
organization. Please note whether any such club or organization
restricts membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion,
national origin, age, or handicap.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of the following
professional societies Location Date of membership
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Physical Society U.S. 35 years ago to
I was the Vice-Chair and then the present
Chair of the Division of Atomic,
Molecular, and Optical Physics in
1990. I currently am the Chair
of the Editorial Advisory Board
of ``Physics Review: Physics
Education Research'' of the
American Physical Society
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Academy of Education U.S. 2008 to present
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Assoc. of Physicists, Canada 2007 to present
member
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optical Society of America U.S. 35 years ago to
present
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Academy of Arts and U.S. 1998 to present
Science
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Academy of Science, U.S. 1995 to present
Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Founding Chair of the National U.S. 1995 to present
Academy of Science/National
Research Council, Board on
Science Education. I currently
serve as a member.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Association of Physics U.S. 10 years ago to
Teachers present
------------------------------------------------------------------------
European Academy of Sciences Europe 2004 to present
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Membership to the National Academy of Education, the National
Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Science, and the
European Academy of Sciences is by election, based on academic
credentials only. Membership in the other organizations is
unrestricted.
13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
(elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
personally liable for that debt: No.
14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $500 or more for the past 10 years. Also list all offices you
have held with, and services rendered to, a state or national political
party or election committee during the same period.
I have held no offices. My political contributions are listed
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2/26/2000 National Committee For Effective $600
Congress (NCEC)
5/30/2000 NCEC $500
8/26/2000 NCEC $500
2/17/2001 NCEC $600
6/4/2001 NCEC $500
9/8/2001 NCEC $600
2/9/2002 NCEC $600
4/20/2002 Mark Udall for Congress $500
5/11/2002 NCEC $600
8/24/2002 Strickland for Colorado $500
9/7/2002 Rush Holt for Congress $500
9/13/2002 NCEC $600
10/14/2002 Colorado Democratic Victory Fund $500
10/14/2002 Strickland for Colorado $500
10/15/2002 NCEC $500
2/15/2003 NCEC $600
4/19/2003 Mark Udall for Congress $500
5/17/2003 NCEC $600
8/23/2003 Democratic National Committee $500
9/20/2003 NCEC $600
11/22/2003 League of Conservation Voters $400
12/22/2003 NCEC $600
1/10/2004 Democratic National Committee $500
2/7/2004 NCEC $600
3/13/2004 Colorado Democratic Victory Fund $500
4/10/2004 John Kerry for President $500
5/22/2004 NCEC $600
7/10/2004 Democratic National Committee $500
8/7/2004 Democratic Senate Campaign Fund $500
8/7/2004 House Majority Project $500
8/8/2004 NCEC $500
8/21/2004 Matsunaka for Congress $500
9/4/2004 Dave Thomas for Congress $500
9/11/2004 Colorado Democratic Victory Fund $500
9/28/2004 Democratic National Committee $1,000
10/10/2004 League of Conservation Voters $600
10/10/2004 Salazar For Senate $1,000
10/10/2004 Matsunaka For Congress $500
10/10/2004 Colorado Democratic Senate $500
Campaign Fund
10/18/2004 NCEC $1,000
1/8/2005 Democratic National Committee $500
2/5/2005 NCEC $600
3/5/2005 Colorado Democratic Victory Fund $500
5/28/2005 NCEC $600
7/16/2005 Democratic National Committee $500
8/27/2005 NCEC $500
9/17/2005 League of Conservation Voters $500
10/30/2005 Mark Udall for Congress $500
11/11/2005 Democratic Senatorial Campaign $500
Committee
12/10/2005 Democratic Senate Campaign Fund $500
1/7/2006 Democratic National Committee $500
2/4/2006 NCEC $1,000
3/4/2006 Colorado Democratic Victory Fund $500
3/4/2006 House Majority Project $500
9/23/2006 League of Conservation Voters $1,000
9/23/2006 Dem Sen Cmp Cmm Dirct MA $500
9/24/2006 Bill Ritter For Governor $500
9/28/2006 National Committee For Effective $1,500
Congress
8/8/2007 NCEC $2,000
8/9/2007 League of Conservation Voters $1,000
8/9/2007 Democratic Senatorial Campaign $1,000
Committee (DSCC)
10/3/2007 Democratic National Committee $1,000
12/18/2007 Bill Foster For Congress $500
7/10/2008 Fitz-Gerald For Congress $500
8/12/2008 NCEC $2,000
8/12/2008 League of Conservation Voters $1,000
8/12/2008 DSCC $1,000
8/12/2008 Democratic National Committee $1,000
10/8/2008 Udall For Colorado $500
10/8/2008 NCEC $1,000
10/10/2008 Obama For America $1,000
8/5/2009 NCEC $2,000
8/5/2009 League of Conservation Voters $1,000
8/5/2009 DSCC $500
8/5/2009 Democratic National Committee $1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
for outstanding service or achievements.
Honors and Awards
1. Physics Research
E.O. Lawrence Award in Physics (DOE), 1993
Davisson-Germer Prize (APS), 1994
Einstein Medal for Laser Science (Society for Opt. and Quant.
Elect.), 1995
Richtmyer Memorial Lecture Award (Am. Assoc. of Physics
Teachers), 1996
Fritz London Prize in Low Temperature Physics, 1996 (IUPAP)
Newcomb Cleveland Prize (AAAS), 1996
King Faisal International Prize for Science, 1997
Award for Science (Bonfils-Stanton Foundation), 1997
Lorentz Medal (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences),
1998
R. W. Wood Prize (Optical Society of America), 1999
Schawlow Prize for Laser Science (American Physical Society),
1999
Benjamin Franklin Medal in Physics (Franklin Institute), 2000
Nobel Prize in Physics, 2001
Nobel Prize Citation: ``For the achievement of Bose-
Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms,
and for early fundamental studies of the properties of
the condensates''
Vollum Award for Distinguished Accomplishment in Science and
Technology, Reed College, 2009
2. Education
NSF Director's Award for Distinguished Teaching Scholars, 2001
Presidential Teaching Scholar, University of Colorado, 2004
U.S. Professor of the Year, the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and
Support of Education, 2004
MERLOT Editor's Choice Award for Exemplary Online Resources,
2006
Oersted Medal, American Association of Physics Teachers, 2007
3. Honorary Memberships and Fellowships
National Academy of Sciences, elected 1995
American Academy of Arts & Sciences, elected 1998
European Academy of Sciences, elected 2004
National Academy of Education, elected 2008
Hertz Foundation Fellow, 1973-1977
Sloan Research Fellowship, 1984
Guggenheim Fellowship, 1990-1991
Fellow of the American Physical Society, 1990
Distinguished Research Lectureship (University of Colorado),
1996-97
Frew Fellowship (Australian Academy of Science), 1998
Cherwell-Simon Lecturer, (Oxford University), 1999
Phi Beta Kappa Society Visiting Scholar, 1999-2000
4. Honorary Degrees
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), University of Chicago, 1997
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), Ohio State, 2005
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), Willamette University, 2007
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), North Carolina State
University, 2008
16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have
authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you
have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been
nominated. Do not attach copies of these publications unless otherwise
instructed.
See attached lists of publications (in my C.V.) and speeches.
The speeches are primarily lectures on various aspects of physics
and science education. These lists include all the publications and
speeches I could find through a review of my records.
17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
governmental capacity and specify the date and subject matter of each
testimony.
Testified before the Research and Education Subcommittee of the
House Committee on Science and Technology on March 7, 2002 and March
15, 2006. Both times the subject matter was science education.
18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
operational objectives of the department/agency to which you have been
nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you
believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for
which you have been nominated, and why do you wish to serve in that
position?
The Associate Director for Science needs to provide advice that
will preserve and enhance the scientific research base of the country
and the scientific work force. My experiences as a highly successful
research scientist, director of a substantial research lab, and as a
long time science educator qualify me for that position. An important
component of this position will also be to implement the
administration's desire to provide a high quality STEM education for
all students. In addition to my research career in science, I have
worked extensively in STEM education research, and I served as the
Founding Chair and long-time member of the National Academy of Science/
National Research Council, Board on Science Education. In these
positions I have acquired expertise and knowledge on all aspects of
STEM education and how it can be improved, and my work in this area has
been widely recognized.
19 .What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
ensure that the department/agency has proper management and accounting
controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large
organization?
I will have the general responsibility shared by every Federal
employee to ensure that government funds are being used in the most
effective and efficient way possible. This responsibility applies both
to the internal OSTP work and the broader OSTP mission to ensure that
agency and department programs are being coordinated and executed
appropriately. However, if confirmed as an OSTP Associate Director, I
will have limited direct responsibility for general management and
accounting controls at OSTP, as those are primarily handled by the
Operations Manager, Deputy Chief of Staff and Chief of Staff. I will
assist in implementing those agency controls. I will have direct
responsibility for my own staff of Policy Analysts, Senior Policy
Analysts and Assistant Directors should I be confirmed.
I have experience in managing organizations that are small by
Federal Government standards, but are comparable to OSTP and relatively
large relative to the component of OSTP that I will oversee if
confirmed. For most of the past 20 years I was in charge of a
multimillion dollar NSF grant that supported the work of approximately
100 researchers and staff. I was responsible for ensuring that they
followed proper management and spending and accounting practices, and I
was responsible for setting overall research goals and making
programmatic funding decisions. I also served a two-year term as Chair
of JILA, a joint federal-state research institution with a staff of
about 250. Since my NSF grant was by far the largest grant supporting
JILA, even when not Chair I had ongoing de facto management
responsibilities for the institute as a whole.
20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
department/agency, and why?
I believe that the biggest challenge facing OSTP is simply the
scale of its mandate. It is charged to advise the President on all
aspects of science and technology relevant to the country. In modern
society that mandate becomes ever larger and more important as science
and technology both grows in scope and plays an increasingly large role
in such broad issues as the economy, national security, health, meeting
growing energy demands, and protection of the environment. Good advice
on enhancing the vitality and value of S & T in the country needs to
not only include all aspects of research and development, but also
education and the technical workforce that are at the heart of a
vibrant economy and a vibrant creative S & T enterprise. Evaluating and
coordinating scientific and technological efforts, developing budgets,
performing studies and analysis, etc. across this vast mandate is a
great challenge. Such a mandate requires seeking out the expertise and
wisdom of a large range of scientifically and technically excellent
people, both inside and outside the government.
The second challenge I see is finding effective means to impact
policies and actions in ways that are beneficial to the Nation. The
OSTP does not have great authority or control of budgets, and so its
tools for achieving action are limited. Its primary tool is the
development of persuasive arguments that convince people to move in the
right direction. That is not easy, particularly when bold rapid action
is needed.
The third challenge is to develop and maintain suitable
relationships across the full span of relevant Federal agencies and
organizations and nongovernmental entities to ensure first, that we
hear all the voices in the broad S & T discussion, and second, we are
present in important policy discussions to provide useful advice. The
breadth of the OSTP mandate and the limitations of its means to have an
impact make it both challenging and essential to establish these
relationships.
b. potential conflicts of interest
1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
accounts.
If confirmed, I will take an unpaid leave of absence from my
position as Professor at the University of British Columbia and an
unpaid leave of absence from my position as Professor at the University
of Colorado.
Upon confirmation, I will resign my position as Director of the
Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative at the UBC and as Director of
the Science Education Initiative at University of Colorado. I will
maintain my UBC pension plan and my TIAA-CREF retirement plan through
the University of Colorado.
2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
association or other organization during your appointment? If so,
please explain.
If confirmed, I will take an unpaid leave of absence from my
position as Professor at the University of British Columbia and an
unpaid leave of absence from my position as Professor at the University
of Colorado.
Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with
the Office of Government Ethics and OSTP's designated agency ethics
official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential
conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of
an ethics agreement that I have entered into with the Department's
designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this
committee. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest.
3. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last 10 years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated: None.
4. Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have
been engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the
passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the
administration and execution of law or public policy.
I wrote a few OpEd pieces encouraging support for legislation to
provide greater support for science research and science education.
5. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance
with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with the
Department's designated agency ethics official and that has been
provided to this committee.
c. legal matters
1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics
by, or been the subject of a complaint to any court, administrative
agency, professional association, disciplinary committee, or other
professional group? If so, please explain.
I have never been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics or
been the subject of such a complaint. However, earlier this year an
audit at the University of Colorado questioned $2,200 I had authorized
to be spent in connection with the Science Education Initiative that I
direct. These funds came from an account that had been endowed by a
donor to the University, and it was my understanding that the funds
were for my unrestricted use. According to the Chancellor of the
University, the audit determined that--while I am generally free to use
the funds as I see fit--they are still subject to the University's
general policies because they were dispersed through the University's
financial system. The audit identified $2,200 that was spent on
services not reimbursable under University policy (out of a total of
over $300,000 that I have donated to University projects from this
account). The Chancellor has assured me that the University has
determined that I had in no way intentionally misused any funds nor did
I obtain any personal gain, and has taken no further action. I have
since taken a training course on the University's fiscal certification
to avoid any such misunderstandings in the future.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain: No.
3. Have you or any business of which you are or were an officer
ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency proceeding or
civil litigation? If so, please explain: No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, please explain: No.
5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
harassment or discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or
any other basis? If so, please explain: No.
6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
connection with your nomination: None.
d. relationship with committee
1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with
deadlines for information set by Congressional committees? Yes
2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can
to protect Congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal
for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
reasonably requested to do so? Yes.
______
resume of carl edwin wieman
Address
Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative (CWSEI)
University of British Columbia
300-6174 University Blvd.
Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3
Personal
Born March 26, 1951, Corvallis, Oregon
Degrees
Bachelor of Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1973
Ph.D., Stanford University, 1977
Appointments
Assistant Research Scientist, Department of Physics, University of
Michigan, 1977-1979
Assistant Professor of Physics, University of Michigan, 1979-84
Associate Professor of Physics, University of Colorado, 1984-87
Fellow, JILA, 1985 to present
Professor of Physics, University of Colorado, 1987-1997
Chair, JILA, 1993-1995
Distinguished Professor, University of Colorado, 1997 to present
Director, Science Education Initiative, University of Colorado,
2006 to present
Professor of Physics, University of British Columbia, 2007 to
present
Director, Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative, University of
British Columbia, 2007 to present
Current Major Service Positions
Chair, Editorial Advisory Board, ``Physics Review: Physics
Education Research'' of the American Physical Society
Member, National Academy of Science/National Research Council Board
on Science Education, (Founding Chair, 2004-2009)
Member, Advisory Board, National Math and Science Initiative
Member, Presidential Advisory Board, Research Corporation for
Science Advancement Chair, Advisory Board, Excellence Centre for
Science and Mathematics Education, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia
Honors and Awards
Physics Research
E.O. Lawrence Award in Physics (DOE), 1993
Davisson-Germer Prize (APS) 1994
Einstein Medal for Laser Science (Society for Opt. and Quant.
Elect.), 1995
Richtmyer Memorial Lecture Award (Am. Assoc. of Physics
Teachers), 1996
Fritz London Prize in Low Temperature Physics, 1996 (IUPAP)
Newcomb Cleveland Prize (AAAS), 1996
King Faisal International Prize for Science, 1997
Award for Science (Bonfils-Stanton Foundation), 1997
Lorentz Medal (Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences),
1998
R. W. Wood Prize (Optical Society of America), 1999
Schawlow Prize for Laser Science (American Physical Society),
1999
Benjamin Franklin Medal in Physics (Franklin Institute), 2000
Nobel Prize in Physics, 2001
Nobel Prize Citation: ``For the achievement of Bose-
Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms,
and for early fundamental studies of the properties of
the condensates''
Vollum Award for Distinguished Accomplishment in Science and
Technology, Reed College, 2009
Education
NSF Director's Award for Distinguished Teaching Scholars, 2001
Presidential Teaching Scholar, University of Colorado, 2004
U.S. Professor of the Year, the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and
Support of Education, 2004
MERLOT Editor's Choice Award for Exemplary Online Resources,
2006
Oersted Medal, American Association of Physics Teachers, 2007
Honorary Memberships and Fellowships
National Academy of Sciences, elected 1995
American Academy of Arts & Sciences, elected 1998
European Academy of Sciences, elected 2004
National Academy of Education, elected 2008
Hertz Foundation Fellow, 1973-1977
Sloan Research Fellowship, 1984
Guggenheim Fellowship, 1990-1991
Fellow of the American Physical Society, 1990
Distinguished Research Lectureship, 1996-97 (University of
Colorado)
Frew Fellowship (Australian Academy of Science), 1998
Cherwell-Simon Lecturer, (Oxford University), 1999
Phi Beta Kappa Society Visiting Scholar, 1999-2000
Honorary Degrees
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), University of Chicago, 1997
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), Ohio State, 2005
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), Willamette University, 2007
Doctorate of Science (Honorary), North Carolina State
University, 2008
Professional Associations
Optical Society of America
American Physical Society
American Association of Physics Teachers
Canadian Association of Physicists
National Academy of Science
National Academy of Education
Patents
S. Chu, W. Swann and C. Wieman, ``Frequency standard using an
atomic fountain of optically trapped atoms,'' Patent
#5,338,930, August 16, 1994.
M. S. E. Stephens, P. A. Roos, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell,
``Laser sensor using optical feedback-induced frequency
modulation,'' Patent #5,808,743, September 15, 1998.
C. E. Wieman, Z.-T. Lu, K. L. Corwin and C. Hand, ``Stable
Wavelength Diode Laser using the Zeeman Shift in an Atomic
Vapor,'' Patent #6,009,111, December 28, 1999.
Publications
1. T. W. Hansch, S. A. Lee, R. Wallenstein and C. Wieman,
``Doppler-free two-photon spectroscopy of hydrogen 1s-2s,'' Phys. Rev.
Lett. 34, 307 (1975).
2. B. Brown, G. Henry, R. Keopcke and C. Wieman, ``High-resolution
measurement of the response of an isolated bubble domain to pulsed
magnetic fields,'' IEEE Trans. Magnetics 11, 1391 (1975).
3. C. E. Wieman and T. W. Hansch, ``Doppler-free laser polarization
spectroscopy,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 1170 (1976).
4. R. Feinberg, T. Hansch, A. Schawlow, R. Teets and C. Wieman,
``Laser polarization spectroscopy of atoms and molecules,'' Opt. Comm.
18, 227 (1976).
5. Wieman and T. Hansch, ``Precision measurement of the ground
state Lamb shift in hydrogen and deuterium,'' in Laser Spectroscopy
III, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, Jackson Lake
Lodge, Wyoming, USA (J. L. Hall and J. L. Carlsten, Eds., Springer-
Verlag), 39-43 (1977).
6. R. Teets and C. Wieman, ``Polarization spectroscopy,'' Focus on
Science (Coherent Radiation) 1, 1 (1977).
7. C. E. Wieman, ``Search for parity violation in atomic
hydrogen,'' in Proceedings of the 1979 Cargese Workshop on Neutral
Current Interactions in Atoms (W. L. Williams, Ed., 1980).
8. C. E. Wieman and T. W. Hansch, ``Precision measurement on the 1s
Lamb shift and of the 1s-2s isotope shift of H and D,'' Phys. Rev. A
22, 192 (1980).
9. D. Shiner and C. E. Wieman, ``Current work on two photon
excitation in a hydrogen beam for measurement of the Rydberg constant
and me/mp,'' in Precision Measurement and Fundamental Constants II (B.
N. Taylor and W. D. Phillips, Eds., Natl. Bur. Stand. Spec. Publ. 617,
1984).
10. S. L. Gilbert and C. E. Wieman, ``An easily constructed high
vacuum valve,'' Rev. Sci. Instr. 53, 1627 (1982).
11. C. E. Wieman and S. L. Gilbert, ``Laser frequency stabilization
using mode interference from a reflecting reference interferometer,''
Opt. Lett. 7, 480 (1982).
12. S. L. Gilbert, R. Watts and C. E. Wieman, ``Hyperfine structure
measurement of the 7s state of cesium,'' Phys. Rev. A 27, 581 (1983).
13. R. N. Watts, S. L. Gilbert and C. E. Wieman, ``Precision
measurement of the Stark shift of the 6s-7s transition in atomic
cesium,'' Phys. Rev. A 27, 2769 (1983).
14. C. E. Wieman, ``Lineshapes in nonlinear spectroscopy,'' in
Quantum Metrology and Fundamental Constants (G. Cutler and A. Lucas,
Eds., Plenum Press, 1983).
15. C. E. Wieman, ``Laser spectroscopy of hydrogen and the
measurement of the fundamental constants,'' in Quantum Metrology and
Fundamental Constants (G. Cutler and A. Lucas, Eds., Plenum Press,
1983).
16. C. E. Wieman, ``Polarization spectroscopy,'' in Laser Based
Ultrasensitive Spectroscopy (R. A. Keller, Ed., SPIE Press, 1983).
17. S. L. Gilbert, R. N. Watts and C. E. Wieman, ``Measurement of
the 6s7s M1 transition in cesium with the use of crossed
electric and magnetic fields,'' Phys. Rev. A 29, 137 (1984).
18. S. L. Gilbert, M. C. Noecker, and C. E. Wieman, ``Absolute
measurement of the photoionization cross section of the excited 7s
state of cesium,'' Phys. Rev. A 29, 3150 (1984).
19. R. N. Watts and C. E. Wieman, ``Stopping atoms with diode
lasers,'' in Laser Spectroscopy VII, Proceedings of the Seventh
International Conference, Hawaii, June 24-28, 1985 (T. W. Hansch and Y.
R. Shen, Eds., Springer-Verlag, 1985), pp. 20-21.
20. C. E. Wieman, S. Gilbert, R. Watts and M. C. Noecker, ``Atomic
parity violation using the crossed beam interference technique,'' in
Laser Spectroscopy VII, Proceedings of the Seventh International
Conference, Hawaii, June 24-28, 1985 (T. W. Hansch and Y. R. Shen,
Eds., Springer-Verlag, 1985), pp. 37-40.
21. S. L. Gilbert, M. C. Noecker, R. N. Watts and C. E. Wieman,
``Measurement of parity nonconservation in atomic cesium,'' Phys. Rev.
Lett. 55, 2680 (1985).
22. R. N. Watts and C. E. Wieman, ``The production of a highly
polarized atomic cesium beam,'' Opt. Comm. 57, 45 (1986).
23. R. N. Watts and C. E. Wieman, ``Manipulating atomic velocities
using diode lasers,'' Opt. Lett. 11, 291 (1986).
24. S. L. Gilbert and C. E. Wieman, ``Atomic-beam measurement of
parity nonconservation in cesium,'' Phys. Rev. A 34, 792 (1986).
25. D. E. Pritchard, E. L. Raab, V. Bagnato, R. N. Watts and C. E.
Wieman, ``Light traps using spontaneous forces,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 57,
310 (1986).
26. S. L. Gilbert, B. P. Masterson, M. C. Noecker, and C. E.
Wieman, ``Precision measurement of the off-diagonal hyperfine
interaction,'' Phys. Rev. A 34, 3509 (1986).
27. C. E. Wieman, S. L. Gilbert and M. C. Noecker, ``A new
measurement of parity nonconservation in atomic cesium,'' in Atomic
Physics 10, (H. Narumi and I. Shimamura, Eds., North Holland, 1987),
pp. 65-76.
28. D. W. Sesko and C. E. Wieman, ``A high frequency Fabry-Perot
phase modulator,'' Appl. Opt. 26, 1663 (1987).
29. C. E. Wieman, M. C. Noecker, B. P. Masterson and J. Cooper,
``Asymmetric line shapes for weak transitions in strong standing wave
fields,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1738 (1987).
30. C. E. Wieman, ``Parity nonconservation in atoms,'' (Physics
News of 1986) Physics Today 40, S. 24 (1987).
31. C. E. Tanner, B. P. Masterson and C. E. Wieman, ``Atomic beam
collimation using a laser diode with a self-locking power-buildup
cavity,'' Opt. Lett. 13, 357 (1988).
32. D. Sesko, C. G. Fan and C. E. Wieman, ``Production of a cold
atomic vapor using diode-laser cooling,'' J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 5, 1225
(1988).
33. C. E. Tanner and C. E. Wieman, ``Precision measurement of the
Stark shift in the 6S1/26P3/2 cesium
transition using a frequency-stabilized laser diode,'' Phys. Rev. A 38,
162 (1988).
34. C. E. Wieman, ``Parity (Quantum Mechanics),'' in 1989 McGraw-
Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology (McGraw-Hill, 1988), 274.
35. C. E. Tanner and C. E. Wieman, ``Precision measurement of the
hyperfine structure of the 133Cs 6P3/2, state,''
Phys. Rev. A 38, 1616 (1988).
36. M. C. Noecker, B. P. Masterson and C. E. Wieman, ``Precision
measurement of parity nonconservation in atomic cesium: A low energy
test of the electroweak theory,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 310 (1988).
37. C. E. Wieman, ``Ion crystals,'' (Physics News of 1988), Physics
Today 42, S. 13 (1989).
38. D. W. Sesko and C. E. Wieman, ``Observation of the cesium clock
transition in laser cooled atoms,'' Opt. Lett. 14, 269 (1989).
39. G. J. Dixon, C. E. Tanner and C. E. Wieman, ``432-nm source
based on efficient second-harmonic generation of GaA1As diode-laser
radiation in self-locking external resonant cavity,'' Opt. Lett. 14,
pp. 731-733 (1989).
40. D. Sesko, T. Walker, C. Monroe, A. Gallagher and C. Wieman,
``Collisional losses from a light force atom trap,'' Phys. Rev. Lett.
63, pp. 961-964 (1989).
41. M. C. Noecker, B. P. Masterson, C. E. Wieman and S. L. Gilbert,
``An improved measurement of parity nonconservation in atomic cesium: A
low energy test of the electroweak theory and first observation of the
nuclear anapole moment,'' in Atomic Physics 11, Paris, July 1988 (S.
Haroche, J. Gay and G. Grynberg, Eds., World Scientific, Singapore,
1989), pp. 619-621.
42. C. Wieman, ``Parity nonconservation in atomic physics,'' in
From Actions to Answers, Proceedings of the 1989 Theoretical Advanced
Study Institute in Particle Physics (T. Degrand and D. Toussaint, Eds.,
World Scientific, 1990), pp. 645-654.
43. C. Wieman and S. Chu, Eds., Special Issue on Laser Trapping and
Cooling, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 6, 11 (1989).
44. T. Walker, D. Sesko and C. Wieman, ``Collective behavior of
optically trapped neutral atoms,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, pp. 408-411
(1990).
45. T. G. Walker, D. W. Sesko, C. Monroe and C. Wieman,
``Collisional loss mechanisms in light-force atom traps,'' in
Proceedings, Sixteenth International Conference on the Physics of
Electronic and Atomic Collisions, (A. Dalgarno et al., Eds., Am.
Instit. Phys., New York, 1990), pp. 593-598.
46. C. Wieman and L. Hollberg, ``Using diode lasers for atomic
physics,'' (invited review) Rev. Sci. Instrum. 62, pp. 1-20 (1991).
47. D. Sesko, T. Walker and C. Wieman, ``Behavior of neutral atoms
in a spontaneous force trap,'' J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 8, pp. 946-958
(1991).
48. C. Monroe, W. Swann, H. Robinson and C. Wieman ``Very cold
trapped atoms in a vapor cell,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, pp. 1571-1574
(1990).
49. C. Monroe, H. Robinson and C. Wieman, ``Observation of the
cesium clock transition using laser-cooled atoms in a vapor cell,''
Opt. Lett. 16, pp. 50-52 (1991).
50. C. Wieman, T. Walker, D. Sesko and C. Monroe, ``Curious
behavior of optically trapped atoms,'' in Atomic Physics 12, AIP Conf
Proc. 233 (J. C. Zorn and R. R. Lewis, Eds., Am. Instit. Phys., New
York, 1991), pp. 58-73.
51. H. Patrick and C. E. Wieman, ``Frequency stabilization of a
diode laser using simultaneous optical feedback from a diffraction
grating and a narrowband Fabry-Perot cavity,'' Rev. Sci. Instrum. 62,
pp. 2593-2595 (1991).
52. E. A. Cornell, C. Monroe and C. E. Wieman, ``A multiply-loaded,
ac magnetic trap for neutral atoms,'' Phys Rev. Lett. 67, pp. 2439-2442
(1991).
53. C. E. Wieman, C. Monroe and E. Cornell, ``Fundamental Physics
with optically trapped atoms,'' in Laser Spectroscopy X, (M. Ducloy,
Ed., World Scientific, 1992), pp. 77-82.
54. K. Lindquist, M. Stephens and C. Wieman, ``Experimental and
theoretical study of the vapor-cell Zeeman optical trap,'' Phys. Rev. A
46, pp. 4082-4090 (1992).
55. C. Sackett, E. Cornell, C. Monroe and C. Wieman, ``A new
magnetic suspension system for atoms and bar magnets,'' Am. J. Phys.
61, pp. 304-309 (1993).
56. K. B. MacAdam, A. Steinbach and C. Wieman, ``A narrow band
tunable diode laser system with grating feedback, and a saturated
absorption spectrometer for Cs and Rb,'' Am. J. Phys. 60, pp. 1098-1111
(1992).
57. C. Monroe, E. Cornell and C. Wieman, ``The low (temperature)
road toward Bose-Einstein condensation in optically and magnetically
trapped cesium atoms,'' in Proceedings of the International School of
Physics `Enrico Fermi', Course CXVIII, Laser Manipulation of Atoms and
Ions, (E. Arimondo, W. D. Phillips, and F. Strumia, Eds., North
Holland, 1992), pp. 361-377.
58. B. P. Masterson, C. Tanner, H. Patrick and C. Wieman, ``A high
brightness, high purity spin polarized cesium beam,'' Phys. Rev. A 47,
pp. 2139-2145 (1993).
59. C. E. Wieman, ``Atomic parity nonconservation,'' Physics in
Collision 12 (J. Cumalat, Ed., Editions Frontiers, Gif-sur-Yvette,
France, 1993), pp.47-63.
60. C. R. Monroe, E. A. Cornell, C. A. Sackett, C. J. Myatt and C.
E. Wieman, ``Measurement of Cs-Cs elastic scattering at T=30 mK'' Phys.
Rev. Lett. 70, pp. 414-417 (1993).
61. C. J. Myatt, N. R. Newbury and C. E. Wieman, ``Simplified atom
trap using direct microwave modulation of a diode laser,'' Optics
Letts. 47, pp. 649-651 (1993).
62. S. L. Gilbert and C. E. Wieman, ``Laser cooling and trapping
for the masses,'' Optics & Photonics News 4, pp. 8-10 (1993).
63. B. P. Masterson and C. E. Wieman, ``Atomic parity
nonconservation experiments,'' in Precision Tests of the Standard
Electroweak Model (P. Langacker, Ed., World Scientific, Singapore,
1995), pp. 545-76.
64. C. E. Wieman, ``Parity nonconservation in atoms; past work and
trapped atom future,'' in Proc., Workshop on Traps for Antimatter and
Radioactive Nuclei, J. Hyperfine Int. 81, pp. 27-34 (1993).
65. M. Stephens, K. Lindquist and C. Wieman, ``Optimizing the
capture process in optical traps,'' J. Hyperfine Int. 81, pp. 203-215
(1993).
66. C. E. Wieman, S. Gilbert, C. Noecker, P. Masterson, C. Tanner,
C. Wood, C. Cho and M. Stephens, ``Measurement of parity
nonconservation in atoms,'' in Proceedings of the 1992 `Enrico Fermi'
Summer School, Varenna, Italy, Course CXX Frontiers of Laser
Spectroscopy, (T. W. Hansch and M. Inguscio, Eds., North Holland,
1994), pp. 240-285.
67. M. Stephens and C. E. Wieman, ``High collection efficiency in a
laser trap,'' Phy. Rev. Lett. 72, pp. 3787-3790 (1994).
68. M. Stephens, R. Rhodes and C. Wieman, ``A study of wall
coatings for vapor-cell laser traps,'' J. App. Phys. 76, pp. 3479-3488
(1994).
69. L. Young, W. Hill III, S. Sibener, S. D. Price, C. E. Tanner,
C. E. Wieman and S. R. Leone, ``Precision lifetime measurements of Cs
6p2P1/2 and 6p2P3/2 by
single photon counting,'' Phys. Rev. A 50, pp. 2174-2181 (1994).
70. D, J. Wineland, C. E. Wieman and S. J. Smith, ``AIP Conference
Proceedings 323,'' Atomic Physics 14, Fourteenth International
Conference on Atomic Physics, Boulder, CO (1994).
71. C. Wieman, G. Flowers and S. Gilbert, ``Inexpensive laser
cooling and trapping experiment for undergraduate laboratories,'' A. J.
Phys. 63, pp. 317-330 (1995).
72. N. R. Newbury, C. J. Myatt, E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman,
``Gravitational sisyphus cooling of 87Rb in a magnetic trap,'' Phys.
Rev. Lett. 74, pp. 2196-2199 (1995).
73. N. R. Newbury, C. J. Myatt and C. E. Wieman, ``S-Wave elastic
collisions between cold ground state 87Rb atoms,'' Phy. Rev.
A. 51, R2680 (1995).
74. M. Stephens, C. Wieman, K. Corwin, Z. T. Lu, H. Gould and T.
Dinneen, ``Optimizing capture efficiency in a magneto-optical trap,''
Advanced Optical Methods for Ultrasensitive Detection (Bryan L Fearey,
Ed., SPIE 2385) (1995).
75. D. Cho, C.S. Wood, S.C. Bennett, B.P. Masterson, C. E. Tanner
and C. E. Wieman ``Particle astrophysics, atomic physics and
gravitation,'' in Proceedings 14th Moriond Workshop, J. Tran Thanh Van,
(G. Fontaine and E. Hinds, Eds., 1995), pp. 325-329.
76. M. J. Renn, O. Vdovin, D. Z. Anderson, C. E. Wieman and E. A.
Cornell, ``Laser-guided atoms in hollow-core optical fibers,'' Phys.
Rev. Letts. 75, pp. 3253-3256 (1995).
77. M. H. Anderson, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman and
E. A. Cornell, ``Observation of Bose-Einstein condensation in a dilute
atomic vapor,'' Science 269, pp. 198-201 (1995).
78. C. J. Myatt, N. R. Newbury, R. W. Ghrist, S. Loutzenhiser and
C. E. Wieman, ``Multiply loaded magneto-optical trap,'' Optics Letter
21, pp. 290-292 (1996).
79. N. R. Newbury and C. E. Wieman, ``Resource Letter TNA-1:
Trapping of neutral atoms,'' Am. J. Phys. 64, pp. 18-20 (1996).
80. M. J. Renn, E. A. Donley, E. A. Cornell, C. E. Wieman, and D.
Z. Anderson, ``Evanescent wave guiding of atoms in hollow optical
fibers,'' Phys. Rev. A. 53, pp. R648-R651 (1996).
81. D. S. Jin, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman and E. A.
Cornell, ``Collective excitations of a Bose-Einstein condensate in a
dilute gas,'' Phy. Rev. Letts. 77, pp. 420-423 (1996).
82. M.H. Anderson, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, E.
A. Cornell, ``Evidence for Bose-Einstein condensation in a dilute
atomic vapor,'' Laser Spectroscopy (M. Inguscio, M. Allegrini and A.
Sasso, Eds., Word Scientific, Singapore), pp. 3-6 (1996).
83. Z. T. Lu, K. L. Corwin, M. J. Renn, M. H. Anderson, E. A.
Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``A low-velocity intense source of atoms from
a magneto-optical trap,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, pp. 3331-3334 (1996).
84. P. A. Roos, M. Stephens and C. E. Wieman, ``Laser vibrometer
using optical feedback-induced frequency modulation for a single mode
laser diode,'' Applied Optics 35, pp. 6754-6761 (1996).
85. J. R. Ensher, D. S. Jin, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman and E. A.
Cornell, ``Bose-Einstein Condensation in a Dilute Gas: Measurement of
Energy and Ground-State Occupation,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, pp. 4984-
4987 (1996).
86. C. E. Wieman, ``The Richtmyer Memorial Lecture: Bose-Einstein
condensation in an ultracold gas,'' Am. J. Phys. 64, pp. 847-855
(1996).
87. D. S. Jin, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E.
A. Cornell, ``Quantitative Studies of Bose-Einstein Condensation in a
Dilute Atomic Vapor,'' Czech Journal of Physics, Proceedings of the
21st Conference on Low Temperature Physics 46--Suppl., Part S6, pp.
3070-3076 (1996).
88. C. E. Wieman, ``The Creation of Bose-Einstein Condensation in a
Cold Vapor--Fritz London Award Lecture,'' Czech Journal of Physics,
Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Low Temperature Physics 46--
Suppl., Part S6, pp. 2923-2927 (1996).
89. E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Bose-Einstein Condensation,''
Physics News in 1995, (P. F. Schewe, Ed., American Institute of
Physics, 1996), pp. 10-12.
90. S. L. Gilbert and C. Wieman, ``Laser cooling,'' Macmillian
Encyclopedia of Physics, J. Rigden, editor (Simon & Schuster Macmillan,
New York, NY, 1996), pp. 836-838.
91. C. J. Myatt, E. A. Burt, R. W Christ, E. A. Cornell, and C. E.
Wieman, ``Production of Two Overlapping Bose-Einstein Condensates by
Sympathetic Cooling,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, pp. 587-589 (1997).
92. D. S. Jin, M. R. Matthews, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman and E. A.
Cornell, ``Temperature-Dependent Damping and Frequency Shifts in
Collective Excitations of a Dilute Bose-Einstein Condensate,'' Phys.
Rev. Lett. 78, pp. 764-767 (1997).
93. D. Cho, C. S. Wood, S. C. Bennett, J. L. Roberts, and C. E.
Wieman, ``Precision Measurement of the Ratio of Scalar to Tensor
Transition Polarizabilities for the Cesium 6S-7S Transition,'' Phys.
Rev. A, 55, pp. 1007-1011 (1997).
94. C. S. Wood, S. C. Bennett, D. Cho, B. P. Masterson, J. L.
Roberts, C. Tanner and C. E. Wieman, ``Measurement of parity
nonconservation and an anapole moment in cesium,'' Science 275, pp.
1759-1763 (1997).
95. Z.-T. Lu, K. L. Corwin, K. R. Vogel and C. E. Wieman,
``Efficient Collection of 221Fr into a Vapor Cell Magneto-
optical Trap,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, pp. 994-998 (1997).
96. E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, C. J. Myatt, M. J. Holland, E. A.
Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Coherence, correlations, and collisions:
What one learns about Bose-Einstein condensates from their decay,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, pp. 337-340 (1997).
97. C. E. Wieman, ``The creation and study of Bose-Einstein
condensation in a dilute atomic vapor,'' Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A
355, pp. 2247-2257 (1997), Proceedings of the Royal Society Discussion
Meeting Highlights in Quantum Optics.
98. C. E. Wieman, ``Bose-Einstein condensation in an ultracold
gas,'' Inter. J. Mod. Phys. B 11, No. 28, pp. 3281-3296 (1997), Proc.
of Inauguration Conference of Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical
Physics, (World Scientific Publishing Co.).
99. C. E. Wieman, ``Observation and study of Bose-Einstein
Condensation in a cold alkali vapor,'' J. Korean Phys. Soc. 32, No. 3,
pp. 394-397 (March 1998), Proceedings of the 3rd Asia International
Seminar on Atomic & Molecular Physics.
100. J. Williams, R. Walser, C. Wieman, J. Cooper and M. Holland,
``Achieving Steady State Bose-Einstein Condensation,'' Phys. Rev. A 57,
pp. 2030-2036 (1998).
101. C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``The Bose-Einstein
Condensate,'' Scientific American 278, No. 3, pp. 40-45 (1998).
102. D. S. Hall, J. R. Ensher, D. S. Jin, M. R. Matthews, C. E.
Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Recent experiments with Bose-condensed
gases at JILA,'' Proceedings of SPIE 3270, pp. 98-106 (1998).
103. K. L. Corwin. Z.-T. Lu, C. Hand, R. J. Epstein and C. E.
Wieman, ``Frequency-stabilized diode laser using the Zeeman shift in an
atomic vapor,'' App. Optics 37, No. 15, pp. 3295-3298 (1998).
104. D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman and E.
A. Cornell, ``The dynamics of component separation in a binary mixture
of Bose-Einstein condensates,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, pp. 1539-1542
(1998).
105. D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell,
``Measurements of relative phase in two-component mixtures of Bose-
Einstein condensates,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, pp. 1543-1546 (1998).
106. Carl E. Wieman, Photonic, Electronic and Atomic Collisions,
``Bose-Einstein Condensation and PeV Collisions,'' pp. 9-21 (1998),
Proc. of the XX International Conference on the Physics of Electronic
and Atomic Collisions (ICPEAC), Vienna, Austria, (World Scientific
Publishing Co.).
107. M. R. Matthews, D. S. Hall, D. S. Jin, J. R. Ensher. C. E.
Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Dynamical Response of a Bose-Einstein
condensate to a discontinuous Change in Internal State,'' Phys. Rev.
Lett. 81, pp. 243-247 (1998).
108. E. A. Cornell, D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews and C. E. Wieman,
``Having it both ways: Distinguishable yet phase-coherent mixtures of
Bose-Einstein condensates,'' J. Low Temp. Phys. 113, Nos. 3/4, pp. 151-
165 (1998).
109. S. C. Bennett, J. L. Roberts and C. E. Wieman, ``Measurement
of the dc Stark shift of the 6S 7S transition in atomic
cesium,'' Phys. Rev. A 59, pp. R16-R18 (1999).
110. S. C. Bennett and C. E. Wieman, ``Measurement of the 6S
7S transition polarizability in atomic cesium and an improved
test of the standard model,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, p. 2484 (1999).
111. J. L. Roberts, N. R. Claussen, James P. Burke, Jr., Chris H.
Greene, E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Resonant magnetic field
control of elastic scattering in cold 85Rb,'' Phys. Rev.
Lett. 81, pp. 5109-5112 (1998).
112. N. R. Newbury and C. Wieman, Eds., Trapping of Neutral Atoms
(American Association of Physics Teachers, College Park, MD, 1998), 129
pages.
113. C. S. Wood, S. C. Bennett, J. L. Roberts, D. Cho and C. E.
Wieman, ``Precision measurement of parity nonconservation in cesium,''
Can. J. Phys. 77, 7 (1999).
114. Carl E. Wieman, David E. Pritchard and David J. Wineland,
``Atom cooling, trapping and quantum manipulation,'' Centennial
Edition, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 2, pp. S253-S262 (1999).
115. C. E. Wieman, E. A. Cornell, D. Jin, J. Ensher, M. Matthews,
C. Myatt, E. Burt and R. Ghrist, ``The Creation and Study of Bose-
Einstein Condensation in a Cold Alkali Vapor,'' in Proceedings,
Fifteenth International Conference on Atomic Physics: Zeeman-Effect
Centenary, (J. Walraven, Ed.) (1996).
116. C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Bose-Einstein condensation
in a cold vapor,'' in the 1997 King Faisal International Prize, King
Faisal Award Proceedings (King Faisal Foundation, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,
1998), pp. 86-93.
117. D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell,
``Measurements of relative phase and quantum beat note between Bose-
Einstein condensates,'' in Quantum Coherence and Decoherence, ISQM-
Tokyo '98 (Y. A. Ono and K. Fujikawa, Eds., Elsevier, 1999), pp. 123-
128.
118. Wieman, Carl E., ``Recent improvements in measurement of
parity violations in atoms,'' 1, in Atomic Physics 15, ed. W. Bayliss
and G. Drake, AIP press, NY (1999).
119. E. A. Cornell, J. R. Ensher, and C. E. Wieman, ``Experiments
in dilute atomic Bose-Einstein condensation,'' (in M. Inguscio, S.
Stringari, and C. E. Wieman, Eds., Bose-Einstein Condensation in Atomic
Gases, Proceedings of the International School of Physics ``Enrico
Fermi'' Course CXL, Italian Physical Society, October 1999.
120. C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Seventy years later: the
creation of a Bose-Einstein condensate in an ultracold gas,'' Lorentz
Prize talk (1999). Proceedings of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts
and Sciences.
121. K. L. Corwin, S. J. M. Kuppens, D. Cho, and C. E. Wieman,
``Spin-polarized atoms in a circularly polarized optical dipole trap,''
Phys. Rev. Lett, 83, pp. 1311-1314 (1999).
122. M. R. Matthews, B. P. Anderson, P. C. Haljan, D. S. Hall, M.
J. Holland, J. E. Williams, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Watching
a superfluid untwist itself: Recurrence of Rabi oscillations in a Bose-
Einstein condensate,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, p. 3358 (1999).
123. M. R. Matthews, B. P. Anderson, P. C. Haljan, D. S. Hall, C.
E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell, ``Vortices in a Bose-Einstein
Condensate,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, pp. 2498-2501 (1999).
124. D. Cho, S. C. Bennett and C. E. Wieman, ``Transverse cooling
of a cesium atomic beam,'' J. Korean Phys. Soc. 35, 3, pp. 244-247
(1999).
125. M. Inguscio, S. Stringari, and C. E. Wieman, Eds., Bose-
Einstein Condensation in Atomic Gases, Proceedings of the International
School of Physics ``Enrico Fermi'' Course CXL, Italian Physical Society
(1999).
126. C. E. Wieman, ``Precision measurement of parity
nonconservation in cesium and its implications for nuclear and
elementary particle physics,'' in Laser Spectroscopy XIV International
Conference (R. Blatt et al., Eds, World Scientific, pp. 33-40) (1999).
127. S. L. Cornish, N. R. Claussen, J. L. Roberts, E. A. Cornell
and C. E. Wieman, ``Stable 85Rb Bose-Einstein condensates
with widely tunable interactions,'' Physical Rev. Lett. 85, pp. 1795-
1798 (2000).
128. S. Kuppens, K. Corwin, K. Miller, T. Chupp, and C. Wieman,
``Loading an optical dipole trap,'' Phys. Rev. A 62, 013406 (1-13)
(1999).
129. B. P. Anderson, P. C. Halijan, C. E. Wieman and E. A. Cornell,
``Vortex precession in Bose-Einstein condensates: observations with
filled and empty cores,'' Physical Review Letters 85, pp. 2857-2860
(2000).
130. S. Duerr, K. W. Miller, and C. E. Wieman, ``Improved loading
of an optical dipole trap by suppression of radiative escape,''
Physical Review A 63, 011401-1-4 (2000).
131. J. L. Roberts, N. R. Claussen, S. L. Cornish, and C. E.
Wieman, ``Magnetic field dependence of ultracold inelastic collisions
near a Feshbach resonance,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, pp. 728-731 (2000).
132. N. R. Claussen, S. L. Cornish, J. L. Roberts, E. A. Cornell,
C. E. Wieman, `` 85Rb BEC Near a Feshbach Resonance,'' The
17th International Conference on Atomic Physics (ICAP-2000) 17, pp.
325-336 (2001).
133. C. E. Wieman, ``A bibliography of atomic parity violation and
electric dipole moment experiments,'' Flavor Physics for the
Millennium, TASI 2000 (Jonathan L. Rosner, ed., World Scientific)
(2001).
134. J. L. Roberts, N. R. Claussen, S. L. Cornish, E. A. Donley, E.
A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Controlled Collapse of a Bose-Einstein
Condensate,'' Phys Rev Lett. 86, pp. 4211-4214 (2001).
135. J. L. Roberts, J. P. Burke, Jr., N. R. Claussen, S. L.
Cornish, E. A. Donley and C. E. Wieman, ``Improved characterization of
elastic scattering near a Feshbach resonance in 85Rb,''
Phys. Rev. A 64, 024702/1-3 (2001).
136. W. C. Haxton and C. E. Wieman, ``Atomic Parity Nonconservation
and Nuclear Anapole Moments,'' Annual Rev. of Nucl. Part. Sci. 51, pp.
261-293 (2001).
137. E. A. Donley, N. R. Claussen, S. L. Cornish, J. L. Roberts, E.
A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Dynamics of collapsing and exploding
Bose-Einstein condensates,'' Nature 412, pp. 295-299 (2001).
138. C. E. Wieman, T. Applequist, D. Arnett, A. G. Cohen, S. N.
Coppersmith, S. C. Cowley, P. Galison, J. B. Hartle, W. Haxton, J. N.
Marx, C. A. Murray, C. F. Stevens, J. A. Tyson, J. M. Wilson, Physics
in a New Era: An Overview, National Research Council, National Academy
Press, Washington, D.C. (2001).
139. C. E. Wieman, E. A. Donley, N. R. Claussen, S. T. Thompson, S.
L. Cornish and J. L. Roberts, ``Quantum implosions and explosions in a
85Rb BEC,'' in Proc., XV International Conf. on Laser
Spectroscopy (2001).
140. E. A. Donley, B. P. Anderson, and C. E. Wieman, ``New twists
in Bose-Einstein condensation,'' Optics & Photonics News, October
Issue, p.26 (2001).
141. C. E. Wieman, ``Pursuing Fundamental Physics with Novel Laser
Technology,'' in Laser Physics at the Limits (Figger, H., Meschede, D.,
Zimmermann, C., eds.) Springer Verlag, (2002).
142. N. R. Claussen, E. A. Donley, S. T. Thompson and C. E. Wieman,
``Microscopic Dynamics in a Strongly Interacting Bose-Einstein
Condensate,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 010401 (2002).
143. E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Bose-Einstein Condensation
in a Dilute Gas: The First 70 Years and Some Recent Experiments (Nobel
Lecture),'' ChemPhysChem 3, pp.476-493 (2002).
144. E. A. Donley, N. R. Claussen, S. T. Thompson and C. E. Wieman,
``Atom-Molecule Coherence in a Bose-Einstein Condensate,'' Nature 417,
pp. 529-533 (2002).
145. K. W. Miller, S. Duerr and C. E. Wieman, ``rf-induced Sisyphus
cooling in an optical dipole trap,'' Phys. Rev. A 66, 023406 (2002).
146. E. A. Cornell, C. E. Wieman, ``Nobel Lectures in Physics
2001,'' Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 3, pp. 875-893 (2002).
147. N. R. Claussen, S.J.J.M.F. Kokkelmans, S. T. Thompson, E. A.
Donley, E. Hodby and C. E. Wieman, ``Very high precision bound state
spectroscopy near a 85Rb Feshbach resonance,'' Phys. Rev. A
67, 060701 (2003).
148. E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, ``Bose-Einstein Condensation
in a Dilute Gas: The First 70 Years and Some Recent Experiments (Nobel
Lecture),'' in Les Prix Nobel (2001).
149. C. Wieman, ``Good science and business practices also yield
positive educational results,'' Laser Focus World, Comment 40 (April
2004).
150. W. K. Adams, K. K. Perkins, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein and
C. E. Wieman, ``The Design and Validation of the Colorado Learning
Attitudes about Science Survey,'' PERC Proceedings, edited by Jeff
Marx, P. Heron, and S. Franklin, AIP Conf. Proc. (2004).
151. K. K. Perkins, W. K. Adams, N. D. Finkelstein, and C. E.
Wieman, ``Correlating Student Beliefs with Student Learning Using the
Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey,'' PERC Proceedings,
edited by Jeff Marx, P. Heron, and S. Franklin, AIP Conf. Proc. (2004).
152. C. Wieman, ``Firming Up Physics,'' AAPT Announcer 34, 6
(Summer 2004).
153. S. T. Thompson, E. Hodby, and C. E. Wieman, ``Spontaneous
Dissociation of 85Rb Feshbach Molecules,'' Phys Rev Lett.
94, 020401 (2005).
154. K. Perkins and C. Wieman, ``Free on-line resource connects
real-life phenomena to science,'' Physics Education, pp. 93-95 (Jan
2005).
155. E. Hodby, S. T. Thompson, C. A. Regal, M. Greiner, A. C.
Wilson, D. S. Jin, E. A. Cornell, and C. E. Wieman, ``Production
Efficiency of Ultracold Feshbach Molecules in Bosonic and Fermionic
Systems,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 120402 (2005).
156. K. K. Perkins and C. E. Wieman, ``The surprising impact of
seat location on student performance,'' The Physics Teacher 43, 30
(2005).
157. K. K. Perkins, W. K. Adams, N. D. Finkelstein, S. J. Pollock
and C. E. Wieman, ``Correlating student attitudes with student learning
using the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey,'' PERC
Proceedings (2005).
158. C. Wieman, ``Minimize Your Mistakes by Learning from Those of
Others,'' Phys. Teach. 43, pp. 252-253 (2005).
159. J. Barbera, K. Perkins, W. Adams, C. Wieman, ``Studying the
importance of students' beliefs in chemistry education,'' Abstracts of
Papers of the American Chemical Society 230, pp. U752-753 (Aug. 2005).
160. C. Wieman, ``Engaging Students with Active Thinking,'' Peer
Review (Winter 2005).
161. S. Thompson, E. Hodby, C. Wieman, ``Ultracold Molecule
Production Via a Resonant Oscillating Magnetic Field,'' Phys. Rev.
Lett. 95, 190404 (November 2005).
162. S. Singer, H. Dyasi, A. Eisenkraft, P. Hines, M. Lach, D. P.
Licata, N. Pelaez, W. Sandoval, J. Spillane, C. E. Wieman, America's
Lab Report: Investigations in High School Science, Committee on High
School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision, Susan R. Singer, Margaret
L. Hilton, and Heidi A. Schweingruber, eds. Board on Science Education,
Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Education, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. (2005).
163. C. E. Wieman and K. K. Perkins, ``Transforming Physics
Education,'' Physics Today 58, pp. 36-41 (November 2005).
164. C. E. Wieman, ``From the National Academies: Overview of the
National Research Council's Board on Science Education and Personal
Reflections as a Science Teacher,'' Cell Biology Education Features 4,
pp. 118-120 (Summer 2005).
165. C. E. Wieman, ``BEC: The First 10 Years, IN Laser
Spectroscopy,'' Proceedings of the XVII International Conference, eds.
E. A. Hinds, Allister Ferguson, Erling Riis, p. 139 (2005).
166. C. E. Wieman and K. K. Perkins, ``Transforming Physics
Education,'' Obzornik Za Matematiko In Fiziko, Slovene Translation,
ISSN 0473-7466 (2006).
167. S. B. McKagan and C. E. Wieman, ``Exploring Student
Understanding of Energy through the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual
Survey,'' PERC Proceedings 2005, AIP Press (2006).
168. S. B. McKagan, K. K. Perkins, and C. E. Wieman, ``Reforming a
large lecture modern physics course for engineering majors using a PER-
based design,'' PERC Proceedings 2006, AIP Press (2006).
169. K. K. Perkins, W. Adams, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein, S.
Reid, C. E. Wieman, and R. LeMaster, ``PhET: Interactive Simulations
for Teaching and Learning Physics,'' The Physics Teacher 44, 18 (2006).
170. K. K. Perkins, M. M. Gratny, W. Adams, N. D. Finkelstein, and
C. E. Wieman, ``Toward characterizing the relationship between
students' self-reported interest in and their surveyed beliefs about
physics,'' PERC Proceedings 2005, AIP Press, 818, 137 (2006).
171. C. E. Wieman and K. K. Perkins, ``Transforming Physics
Education,'' Parity, Maruzen Co., Japan, Japanese Translation
(September 2006).
172. W. K. Adams, K. K. Perkins, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein and
C. E. Wieman, ``A new instrument for measuring student beliefs about
physics and learning physics: the Colorado Learning Attitudes about
Science Survey,'' Physical Review Special Topics: Phys. Educ. Res. 2,
1, 010101 (2006).
173. S. Cornish, Sarah T. Thompson and Carl E. Wieman, ``Formation
of bright matter-wave solitons during the collapse of Bose--Einstein
condensates,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 170401 (May 2006).
174. C. Wieman and K. Perkins, ``Online Interactive Simulations: A
powerful tool for teaching science,'' Nature Physics 2, pp. 290-292
(May 2006).
175. C. Wieman and K. Perkins, ``Meeting challenges and facing the
music in physics education--Reply,'' Physics Today 59, pp. 10-11 (Aug
2006)
176. N. D. Finkelstein, W. K. Adams, C Keller, K Perkins, C. E.
Wieman and the PhET Team, ``High-Tech Tools for Teaching Physics: the
Physics Education Technology Project,'' Journal of Online Teaching and
Learning 2, No. 3 (September 2006).
177. S. B. Papp and C. E. Wieman, ``Observation of heteronuclear
Feshbach molecules from a 85Rb-87Rb gas,'' Phys.
Rev. Lett. 97, 180404 (November 2006).
178. C. Wieman, ``Science Education in a New Century,'' Academic
Matters, pp. 18-19 (Winter 2006).
179. K. K. Perkins, J. Barbera, W. K. Adams, and C. E. Wieman,
``Chemistry vs. Physics: A Comparison of How Biology Majors View Each
Discipline,'' 2006 PERC Proceedings 883, 53 (2007).
180. W. K. Adams and C. E. Wieman, ``Problem Solving Skill
Evaluation Instrument -Validation Studies,'' PERC Proceedings 2006
(2007).
181. C. Wieman, ``A Scientific Approach to Science Education,''
Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (STLHE)
Newsletter (Fall 2007).
182. C. E. Wieman, ``Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science
Education?'' Change Magazine 39, 5 (September/October 2007).
183. C. Wieman, Collected papers of Carl Wieman, World Scientific
Publishing (2008).
184. W. K. Adams, S. Reid, R. LeMaster, S. B. McKagan, K. K.
Perkins, M. Dubson, and C. E. Wieman, ``A Study of Educational
Simulations Part I--Engagement and Learning,'' Journal of Interactive
Learning Research 19, 3, pp. 397-419 (July 2008).
185. W. K. Adams, S. Reid, R. LeMaster, S. B. McKagan, K. K.
Perkins, M. Dubson, and C. E. Wieman, ``A Study of Educational
Simulations Part II--Interface Design,'' Journal of Interactive
Learning Research 19, 4, pp. 551-577 (October 2008).
186. J. Barbera, W. K. Adams, C. E. Wieman and K. K. Perkins, ``The
Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey: Modification and
Validation for use in Chemistry,'' Journal of Chemical Education 85,
pp. 1435-1439 (October 2008).
187. C. E. Wieman, ``A Scientific Approach to Science Education,''
The Hertz Foundation Newsletter (Winter 2008).
188. K. E. Gray, W. K. Adams, C. E. Wieman and K. K. Perkins,
``Students know what physicists believe, but they don't agree: A study
using the CLASS survey,'' Physical Review Special Topics--Physics
Education Research 4, 020106 (November 2008).
189. C. E. Wieman, W. K. Adams, and K. K. Perkins, ``Oersted Medal
Lecture 2007: Interactive Simulations for Teaching Physics: What works,
what doesn't, and why,'' Theme Double-Issue Computation and Computer-
Based Instruction--American Journal of Physics 76, pp. 393-9 (April/May
2008).
190. S. B. McKagan, K. K. Perkins, and C. E. Wieman, ``Why we
should teach the Bohr model and how to teach it effectively,'' Physical
Review Special Topics--Physics Education Research 4, 010103 (March
2008).
191. J. J. Zirbel, K.-K. Ni, S Ospelkaus, J. P. D'Incao, C. E.
Wieman, J. Ye, and D. S. Jim, ``Collisional stability of fermionic
Feshbach molecules,'' Physical Review Letters 100, 143201 (11 April
2008).
192. S. B. McKagan, K. K. Perkins, M. Dubson, C. Malley, S. Reid,
R. LeMaster, and C. E. Wieman, ``Developing and researching PhET
simulations for teaching quantum mechanics,'' Theme Double-Issue
Computation and Computer-Based Instruction--American Journal of Physics
76, pp. 406-417 (May 2008).
193. J. J. Zirbel, K.-K. Ni, S. Ospelkaus, T. L. Nicholson, M. L.
Olsen, P. S. Julienne, C. E. Wieman, J. Ye, and D. S. Jin,
``Heteronuclear molecules in an optical dipole trap,'' Physical Review
A. 78, 013416 (July 2008).
194. S. B. Papp, J. M. Pino, and C. E. Wieman, ``Tunable
miscibility in a dual-species Bose-Einstein condensate,'' Physical
Review Letters 101, 040402 (July 2008).
195. S. B. Papp, J. M. Pino, R. J. Wild, S. Ronen, C. E. Wieman, D.
S. Jin, and E. A. Cornell, ``Bragg Spectroscopy of a Strongly
Interacting 85Rb Bose-Einstein Condensate,'' Physical Review
Letters 101, 135301 (26 September 2008).
196. C. E. Wieman, W. K. Adams, and K. K. Perkins, ``PhET:
Simulations that Enhance Learning,'' Science 322, pp. 682-683 (October
2008).
197. J. Barbera and C. E. Wieman, ``Effect of a Dynamic Learning
Tutorial on Undergraduate Students' Understanding of Heat and the First
Law of Thermodynamics,'' The Chemical Educator 14, pp. 45-48 (2009).
198. S. B. McKagan, K. K. Perkins, M. Dubson, C. Malley, S. Reid,
R. LeMaster, and C. E. Wieman, ``A deeper look at student learning of
quantum mechanics: the case of tunneling,'' Phys Rev. ST Physics Ed.
Research 4, 020103 (March 2008).
199. J. Barbera, W. K. Adams, C. E. Wieman, and K. K. Perkins,
``Modifying and Validating the Colorado Learning Attitudes about
Science Survey for Use in Chemistry,'' Journal of Chemistry Education
85, pp. 1435-1439 (October 2008).
200. S. B. McKagan, W. Handley, K. K. Perkins and C. E. Wieman, ``A
research-based curriculum for teaching the photoelectric effect,''
American Journal of Physics 77, pp. 87-94 (January 2009).
201. M. K. Smith, W. B. Wood, W. K. Adams, C. E. Wieman, J. Knight,
N. Guild, and T. Su, ``Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance
on In-Class Concept Questions,'' Science 323, pp. 122-124 (January
2009).
202. C. E. Wieman, ``Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science
Education?'' University General Education Bulletin at the Chinese
University of Hong Kong (2009).
203. N. S. Podolefsky, W. K. Adams, and C. E. Wieman, ``Student
Choices when Learning with Computer Simulations,'' PERC Proceedings
2009, AIP Press (2009).
204. H. Alhadlaq, F. Alshaya, S. Alabdulkareem, K. K. Perkins, W.
K. Adams, and C. E. Wieman, ``Measuring Students' Beliefs about Physics
in Saudi Arabia,'' PERC Proceedings 2009, AIP Press (2009).
205. C. E. Wieman, ``Galvanizing Science Department,'' Science 325,
5, p. 1181 (September 2009).
206. W. K. Adams, H. Alhadlaq, C. Mally, K. K. Perkins, J. Olson,
F. Alshaya, S. Alabdulkareem, and C. E. Wieman, ``Making On-line
Science Course Materials Easily Translatable and Accessible Worldwide:
Challenges and Solutions,'' The Multimedia in Physics Teaching and
Learning (MPTL) Conference Proceedings (submitted Sept. 2009).
207. C. E. Wieman, ``Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science
Education?'' Taking Stock: Research on Teaching and Learning in. Higher
Education, School of Policy Studies of Queen's University at Kingston &
McGill-Queen's University Press (2010).
208. C. E. Wieman, K. K. Perkins, S. L Gilbert, ``Transforming
Science Education at Large Research Universities: A Case Study in
Progress,'' Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning (March/April 2010).
209. W. K. Adams and C. E. Wieman, ``Development and validation of
instruments to measure learning of expert-like thinking,''
International Journal of Science Education (submitted).
210. C. E. Wieman, W. K. Adams, P. Loebelin, K. K. Perkins,
``Teaching Physics Using PhET Simulations,'' The Physics Teachers 48,
pp. 225-227 (April 2010).
I also have written a number of publications in relationship to
scientific conferences. These publications overlap with the material of
the papers I listed above.
Other publications not listed above:
Football scandal OpEd, 2/2004, Boulder Daily Camera.
The Optimized University. 2006 A commissioned paper for the
BC ministry of education, posted online and subsequently
reprinted online in various places.
Rebuilding Science OpEd, approximately 2002, Rocky Mountain
News and/or Denver Post.
The importance of science education OpEd, 9/2007, various
Canadian papers.
Senator Pryor. Thank you.
Let me start off here. Senator Udall, I have a few
questions and I'll turn it over to you, and I may clean up
unless you want to do a second round.
But first, let me start with your background. I think it's
interesting that you nearly failed your first physics class.
That gives hope to a lot of first year college students, I'm
sure. But let me ask a question, and it may be the same
question or it may be two different questions, but just for our
background on the Subcommittee: Would you describe your
research on atomic physics and laser spectroscopy and-or--
again, it may be the same question--tell us about the Bose-
Einstein--is it a condensate? Is that what it is?
Dr. Wieman. Condensate, yes.
Senator Pryor. So tell us about those?
Dr. Wieman. OK. So they're actually somewhat different
things. For many years I carried out an extensive program of
using laser light to probe atoms and study their structure,
learn about how they behave, how they interact with light, and
a whole variety of ways that, if we probe more sensitively, we
could understand more details about the structure of atoms.
Out of that work also, as we came to understand better
about atoms and how they interacted with light, we came to
understand how we could control them better as well. Part of
that control meant that the scientific community--and Steve Chu
was one of the leaders in this--part of that control was how
you could use light to actually slow down atoms, if you did
just exactly the right things.
Senator Pryor. So light can actually change the behavior of
atoms?
Dr. Wieman. Light can actually change them. You can think
about light, laser light, as like little ping-pong balls and an
atom as a bowling ball. An atom in the air here is whizzing
along and you're bouncing these little particles of light off
it, and they're giving it little kicks. And if the light has
just the right characteristics, those lots of little kicks slow
down that bowling ball atom.
It turns out a slow atom is a cold atom. So that led us to
understand how you could make them much colder, you could hold
them where you want them. That has technological implications.
We can make better atomic clocks and things. But it also led us
to realize that we could make them so slow, where we possibly
could make them so slow, using these new cooling techniques,
that we could reach this kind of holy grail myth of physics
which was the Bose-Einstein condensate.
This was a new form of matter that Einstein predicted way
back in 1924, just looking at the basic equations of physics.
But it was predicted to happen at ridiculously cold
temperatures and so nobody really took it very seriously.
We figured out how to get things much, much colder than
anyone had cooled atoms before, using this new laser cooling
technology, and we saw that Einstein was right. This strange
new material formed. It's fascinating to study. It doesn't
behave like anything anybody's ever seen before, and we learned
lots about quantum physics as a result of looking at it.
Senator Pryor. Does that mean you actually stop the atom?
Dr. Wieman. We get them very, very, very close to being
stopped.
Senator Pryor. How does that become a new type of matter?
Dr. Wieman. The getting them cold doesn't make them a new
type of matter. What makes them a new type of matter is, as you
get things colder there are the laws of quantum physics that
come into play when we get Bose condensation. People thought
about matter being described by these laws of quantum physics
that are important on the very, very tiny scale, but on the
bigger scale these weird, bizarre quantum behaviors are never
seen.
But if you get things colder, it turns out that the quantum
waviness gets bigger and bigger. So if you get things so cold
that the quantum waviness of one atom starts to overlap the
quantum waviness of its neighbor, then instead of acting like
two independent atoms any more, they turn into one gigantic
quantum wave. And that's what a Bose condensate is; it's a
whole bunch of atoms no longer acting like little particles
that we're used to thinking about atoms as, but as this
gigantic single quantum wave without any individual identities
at all.
I realize that all sounds very strange and sort of weird,
and it's because it is strange and weird, but that's the way
nature behaves.
Senator Pryor. Senator Udall.
Senator Tom Udall. Thank you, Chairman Pryor.
It's very good to have you here today, Dr. Wieman, and we
look forward to your work in the executive branch, especially
in the teaching area. As a researcher, you relied on the NIST
facility in Boulder, Colorado, to help achieve a scientific
breakthrough that led to your joint Nobel Prize. NIST and our
national laboratories contribute much to science and apply some
of the brightest minds in the country to some of the most
significant challenges facing our Nation, from fighting
terrorism to achieving energy independence.
The national labs I think are really crown jewels in our
country's research infrastructure. As Associate Director for
Science, how would you employ the diverse knowledge and work of
the national labs in your efforts to improve our Nation's
competitiveness and maintain our leadership in scientific
research?
Dr. Wieman. So I certainly agree with you on the value of
national labs. As you point out, my close friend and
collaborator at Cornell is a NIST employee and he brought
enormous contributions to making all this work possible. And my
wife actually directed a large research group in NIST for many
years. So I certainly won't disagree about their importance.
I think really, as Associate Director of OSTP if confirmed,
I'd be looking to work, to support the strength and health of
all of the research infrastructure in the U.S. and the national
labs are a major component of that, along with the other
national facilities and the research universities. But
absolutely, the national labs do play a large part in that and
I would see that as an important part of my responsibility, to
make sure they're healthy and properly supported.
Senator Tom Udall. Well, and we really look forward to
working with you. We have two of the great national
laboratories in New Mexico, Los Alamos National Laboratory and
Sandia National Laboratory, that do a lot of the work that I
talked about in terms of energy independence, helping the
warrior out in the field, and a variety of other things.
Let me ask you a little bit about education because I know
that's what you really want to focus on. You note in your
testimony that you attended a tiny rural school in western
Oregon and relied on a public library in a nearby town to
supplement your education. My home State of New Mexico also
faces significant challenges when it comes to rural schools and
especially schools on tribal lands.
Do you have any thoughts on what efforts have been
successful to overcome these challenges to teaching science in
rural schools? Do you have any recommendations for how better
broadband connectivity or access to other technologies might
put students in rural schools on a more even footing with their
peers in metropolitan areas? And also, I talked to you before
the hearing about how you've developed techniques and
protocols, I think, to teach science to children, and I'm
interested in what are those protocols and how do you approach
it, and especially dealing with disadvantaged students.
Dr. Wieman. Starting with the issue of the rural schools, I
think this is a very important issue in the country as we try
and look at the broader workforce and participation issues of
how we can do a better job there, because it is a real
challenge if you're out at a school of seven students in a
grade, like I had, having a good science teacher and good
science teaching there.
I actually started what's now quite a major project in
developing on-line resources, interactive simulations for
teaching science. I think we had about 10 million run off our
website last year, so it's actually one of the major on-line
education resources. We do a lot of work on research on how to
make these effective, how people can learn from them.
So, I see there's tremendous potential to be tapped there,
and it's something I've been quite involved in and would
certainly see an important aspect of working with the
Committee, if confirmed, to advance this.
I will say, though, that, just on the subject of rural
schools, part of what our research shows is the same as
everyone else's: that you have to have an effective teacher in
the classroom, though. So I think that one of the other issues
one has to be addressing is the shortage of well-qualified STEM
teachers in this country, particularly in rural areas, and how
we can better address that need.
Senator Tom Udall. You really hit it on the head, I think.
Thank you.
I think I'm in good shape.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Let me follow up on that last point. How can policymakers
here in Washington improve undergraduate physics courses? How
can we improve those?
Dr. Wieman. Well, this is something that I've been
devoting, well, really quite a number of years, but the last 3
years full-time, to thinking how we can address this. I think
at this point I'm willing to make the claim that we know how to
do this. There's a small community, of which I count myself
part of, that has been approaching the learning of science as a
science and carrying out systematic research about what works
and what doesn't work and why.
I think we understand now the basic principles about how to
do much more effective teaching. I've got some recent
experiments where we've been able to come in and redesign a
course and get over a factor of two improvement compared to the
way a good, qualified teacher has been doing it, and the amount
of learning they've been getting.
So the real challenge now is how to get that implemented,
how to do the policy of changing the practices so that all the
teachers are following effective principles. I can't say that
I'm ready to pronounce, do A, B, C, and D and it'll solve this.
I can say that I think there are some important ideas out
there. It's an area that I come to from the side of
understanding what people need to do. I am not an expert on how
to make policy that accomplishes that.
I can see that, if I'm confirmed to this position, this
would be something I would be working with this committee and
others, to figure out how to best implement the policy to
achieve the results that we are now pretty convinced we know
are possible, and we know how to do it. I think there are
opportunities through looking carefully at how the Federal
dollars are spent and the Federal programs to look carefully at
what the efficiency and the effectiveness, and ask some hard
questions about that and make sure that they're pursuing
directions that we see are more effective.
Senator Pryor. According to this year's Science and
Engineering Indicators Report of the National Science Board,
although America continues to lead in science and engineering,
Asian countries are closing the gap through significantly
increased investments in science and engineering, business
investment, and education and infrastructure. So we may still
be dominant, but it sounds like our dominance is fading.
How will you apply your knowledge in an attempt to redirect
America's course and get us going in the right direction again?
Dr. Wieman. First, I'm not sure we're going in such a wrong
direction. I think you have to look at this from the
perspective, that for the Asian countries, an awful lot of what
has made them successful is they've been copying us. They've
been changing. If we look at their school systems they look
better, but that is really at the K-12 level. There's an awful
lot at the undergraduate level where we do better. We're doing
better than they have in the past, and they're copying this.
And at the graduate level they're putting more money in.
So I think it's an issue of everybody's getting faster. We
have to figure out how we can speed up. I think that that
involves--well, realistically, we're never going to have the
dominance we once did. There were world factors that just
enhanced that. Everybody else is doing better now.
And it's not so terrible. Science is really a global
activity. We all do better when some of us do better. But at
the same time, we'd like to keep the U.S. at the cutting edge.
That means looking hard at what are the gaps, where are places
we really have unique strengths. We can enhance those. I think
there are certainly a number of areas where the U.S. is still
unprecedented, certainly, in innovation, entrepreneurial,
dynamic, independent ways of thinking. The rest of the world
would still love to be like we are.
But if we can provide the work force, the education, that's
pushing our students to the front to build on those, I think we
can do better.
Senator Pryor. Are you familiar with the America Competes
Act?
Dr. Wieman. Yes.
Senator Pryor. It expires at the end of Fiscal Year 2010.
What provisions of America Competes have proven to be the most
successful and which programs do you think should be
strengthened?
Dr. Wieman. Boy, that's a good question, one I'm not sure
I'm yet qualified to answer. I'd have to look carefully at it.
Senator Pryor. Sure. Well, as we go through a
reauthorization, those are the kind of questions we'll be
asking, basically how is it working, are there things that we
need to improve or delete or change, that kind of exercise. So
I hope you can help us through that as we go through.
Dr. Wieman. Yes, and I fully would expect to and want to do
exactly that. It's just that hasn't been my day job right now,
so I'm not quite ready to weigh in.
Senator Pryor. I understand.
STEM is a program that I think has been great in a lot of
ways, and NASA has been kind of a lead agency. Do you think
that NASA should play a leading role with STEM?
Dr. Wieman. In the education aspects? I think that's
unclear. The answer to that's kind of unclear. I think NASA has
a kind of unique role in inspiring people. I wanted to be an
astronaut when I was a child. There's something really dramatic
and inspiring about rockets blasting into outer space to
explore the universe. But at the same time, NASA does not bring
much expertise to exactly what's really critical to achieving
learning in science, engineering, and so on.
part of my work as chairing the Board on Science Education
at the NRC saw this. We were charged to review NASA education
programs. Out of that work, it was clear that they needed to be
looking a lot harder at accountability, at how well their
programs are really working and were they really being guided
by the best understanding of effective STEM education.
So I think it would be probably best to have them focus on
what they're really uniquely good at and the aspects of
education they're uniquely good at, but not necessarily turn
everything over to them. It's getting the right balance.
Senator Pryor. That's fair enough.
The last question I really have is about science parks.
Some people call these innovation centers or business
incubators. There are different words and maybe different
nuances in what they are. But generally, you know what they
are. They're places where science, engineering, and what-not
come together and try to be innovative and get things out to
the marketplace, etcetera.
I've seen first-hand in my state a science park really does
some great things at the University of Arkansas. It has just
been, I think, a real success story. We have a couple of other
sites that are trying to get up and running in our state.
But let me ask you from your perspective, to what extent do
you believe that science parks can contribute to scientific
discovery and to technological advances?
Dr. Wieman. I think science parks can be wonderful. We've
got spectacular examples. You list some in Arkansas. Silicon
Valley, and Stanford, the Stanford Research Park, is a
tremendous example of where it has really been uniquely
powerful at both taking the fundamental research out of the lab
and turning it into innovative products, and then at the same
time turning those products back into the research lab.
Certainly everybody knows about the transistor and
integrated electronics. But for my field of lasers, in fact,
there has been a tremendous amount of work, even from my
graduate school days on up, in the area of laser research
turning into products through the Stanford science park. And
you've got examples at many other universities.
So I think they really have demonstrated they can be
tremendously valuable. I think it is important to put in a note
of caution, though, because people talk a lot more about the
ones that are successful. They don't talk, people don't
advertise the failures, so often. And I do know there are
failures of science parks, where universities or regions tried
to start one up. The University of Colorado is a good example.
They put a lot of money into it, but they really didn't have
all the right pieces, and it just didn't pan out.
So I think, while I certainly would endorse the value of
science parks, I think it's important, if one's looking at
policy to advance these, to look very carefully at what
elements you have to have in place to make them successful and
learn from the failures in terms of making effective ones.
Senator Pryor. I think part of the key there is recognizing
your strengths and having some flexibility and the appropriate
expectations. I know one of the advantages of the one that's in
Fayetteville, Arkansas, at least what I hear about it, is that
because the University of Arkansas is a relatively small
university--it's not a huge university; it only has about maybe
16 or 17,000 students--because it is smaller, that's actually a
strength because the faculty and the researchers tend to know
each other, they work in closer proximity, and they say that
they're better there in sharing ideas and collaborating
together than some of the older, more established institutions,
if that makes sense, where you kind of get your area of
expertise and you're kind of so big that's all you do.
The other thing that they really focus on in Arkansas is
trying to bring these ideas actually to the marketplace. So
like for example, in nanotechnology, their effort there, they
don't just call it nanotechnology. They like to call it ``nano
manufacturing,'' because they really want to try to get these
ideas out of the lab and get them out in the marketplace.
So I know not everybody has the same mission, nor should
they, because there's going to be different strengths and
different roles as we do this. But I agree, I think that they
can play a very significant role in trying to stimulate more
scientific activity, research activity, innovation, technology.
What we're going to do, Dr. Wieman, is we're going to leave
the record open until 6 p.m. tomorrow, for all the Senators and
staffs who want to ask you more questions, like they want to
get you to explain this Bose-Einstein thing one more time or
something like that. We're going to leave it open until
tomorrow evening.
So what we'd ask all the staffs to do and all the offices
to do is to get those as quickly as possible over here to the
Committee, and then we'll get those to you, and a rapid
response would be very much appreciated.
But I want to thank you for your willingness to take on
this public service and really do some great things there and
play a key role in developing this policy and giving advice to
the folks who need it. So I want to thank you for being here
today and thank you for all the folks you brought with you.
So I thank you and we'll adjourn the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 3:31 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator from Florida
Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Dr. Wieman, we had the opportunity to meet last month and from that
conversation, as well as from your testimony here today, I can say that
I'm impressed with your zeal for Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Math (STEM) issues. In your written testimony you state, ``Our global
economy is increasingly based on science and technology. To maintain
U.S. economic competitiveness and leadership in innovation, we need to
also have leadership in STEM education.''
Amen--as Chairman of the Science and Space Subcommittee I share
your enthusiasm on this subject and couldn't agree with you more. The
efforts we make in STEM education today will pay dividends in the
future as the next generation of leaders comes to maturity and strives
to keep the United States as the world's leader in these areas.
Today I'd like to explore these subjects with you a little further
and to gain a better understanding of some of the specific actions you
will take in this important role we are considering for you. I look
forward to our exchange.
Thank you, Mr Chairman.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Bill Nelson to
Carl E. Wieman, Ph.D.
Question 1. During the launch of the ``Educate to Innovate''
Campaign in November 2009, the President called for the expansion of
STEM opportunities for all young people. NASA Administrator Charles
Bolden has also identified STEM education as a pressing need.
In response to this need, NASA is launching the Summer of
Innovation program to increase the scope and scale of the agency's
commitment to STEM. The Summer of Innovation is designed to improve
STEM teaching and learning in partnership with Federal agencies,
philanthropic institutions, universities, industry, museums, nonprofit
organizations, and states and localities.
Dr. Wieman, please discuss the specific actions you intend to take
to meet the President's call to action regarding STEM. How will you
work with NASA to ensure the Nation's space and aeronautics programs
are best used to inspire and educate the nation, especially young
people?
Answer. We know that too often, even students who are proficient in
STEM subjects choose not to pursue them. The STEM ``pipeline'' narrows
dramatically in the older grades, due especially to attrition of girls
and minorities, and it narrows again within the first years of college.
We can and must do better.
I believe NASA has unique assets that can make a significant
difference in addressing this challenge. First is its ability to
inspire and connect with Americans' inherent enthusiasm for discovery.
As I mentioned during my hearing, I was inspired by the space program
as a young boy and even wanted to be an astronaut. As the President has
stated: ``The space program has always captured an essential part of
what it means to be an American--reaching for new heights, stretching
beyond what previously did not seem possible. . . . Space exploration
is not a luxury, it's not an afterthought in America's quest for a
brighter future--it is an essential part of that quest.'' I think we
can do much more to bring that spirit of discovery and imagination into
every community and classroom. NASA's ``Summer of Innovation'' has that
potential.
Question 2. In 2007 Congress passed the America COMPETES Act,
landmark legislation intended to increase the Nation's investment in
research and development (R&D), and in STEM education. Authorizations
for the America COMPETES Act expire this year and, as we consider a
reauthorization and the President's FY 2011 budget proposal, we need to
evaluate the effectiveness of the programs funded by COMPETES in
increasing American innovation and competitiveness.
Dr. Wieman, please comment on the COMPETES Act as implemented thus
far. What changes to the Act would you recommend as we reconsider a
reauthorization this year?
Answer. The America COMPETES Act provides a valuable guide to
Federal policies in innovation, competitiveness, and STEM education. As
with any program of this scope, a review should be welcomed: to
strengthen the parts that have the most capacity to leverage the
American economy and secure America's future, and to trim or amend
those parts that have proven less valuable.
The original COMPETES Act identified three key science agencies--
the National Science Foundation, the DOE Office of Science, and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratories--as
essential to our Nation's future prosperity and to preserving America's
place as the world leader in science and technology. I support the
Administration's ongoing efforts to ensure that the doubling trajectory
for these three agencies remains on track.
One critical role a review of the Federal STEM education program
can do is to look carefully at the STEM education system from an
overall perspective, supporting work to understand what the essential
components are and how they are linked, and what is necessary for each
component to make the final result most effective. Many STEM education
programs are piecemeal, short-term attempts to deal with what is a
complex, long-term problem. The substantial Federal investment in STEM
education requires improved efficiencies and effectiveness for these
investments. Congress made some attempts at this by not funding some
programs in the original authorization. We should streamline
duplicative programs. The reauthorization is an opportunity to
articulate the highest-priority initiatives that truly have the promise
of making significant impacts on innovation and competitiveness and to
leave out studies, programs, or process requirements with minimal
impacts or minimal prospects for funding.
If confirmed, I would work with this committee to streamline the
STEM education components of the bill to ensure the maximum impact on
U.S. STEM education from the Act.