Challenger centers worth cost
Re: The letter, “Challenger seeks taxpayer money,” (June 8): Since 1986, the Challenger Center for Space Science Education has established almost 50 Challenger Learning Centers across the United States. Each allows students and teachers to study and pursue careers in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) and become “real world” problem solvers as they share the excitement of learning through simulated NASA space missions.
Challenger programs are based on core STEM curriculum and include two days of teacher preparation, six weeks of classroom instruction and a trip to the local Challenger Center to “fly” a mission. The cost is approximately $25 per student.
We are developing a Challenger center in Indiana County.
Our local committee has received support from the Homer-Center, Indiana, Blairsville/Saltsburg, Marion Center and United school districts. Each has donated $1 per district student — less than one-eighth of one percent of each district's budget.
These monies have been used to fund our Challenger application fee. If approved, we'll become the Central Allegheny Challenger Learning Center, a non-profit serving 22 counties in western and central Pennsylvania.
Funds to build and sustain the center will be raised from foundations and corporations interested in STEM development and from state and federal grants.
Challenger centers are vital participants in the economic and workforce development of their communities. Ours will provide students with the academic foundation and skills they will need to compete for the highly technical jobs being created here right now in the energy, education, finance and health care industries.
We will be a valuable resource and attraction.
Julia Trimarchi Cuccaro,
The writer chairs the Challenger Committee Ambassador Group.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Oberdorf firing
- Pedro must go
- Steel at stake, too
- Duty to disclose
- Reverse red-kettle ban I
- Not taxpayers’ responsibility
- Reverse red-kettle ban II
- Valid complaints
- Good riddance