|
|
CMSE Online Front
Page |
In 1989 the state governors set as one of our national education goals that the U.S. should be "first in the world in mathematics and science achievement by the year 2000." The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) is helping us understand our progress toward that goal. On February 24, TIMSS released results of its study of twelfth graders around the world; the results contrast sharply with the eighth grade study released in November 1996 and the fourth grade study released in June 1997.
In a nutshell, our fourth graders outperformed our eighth graders and our twelfth graders rank at the bottom of the international standings. U.S. fourth graders ranked above the international average in mathematics, and were outranked by only one nation (Korea) in science. At the eighth grade level, American students are behind the international average in mathematics and only modestly above it in science. At the twelfth grade, U.S. students outperformed only two countries (Cyprus and South Africa) in mathematics and five countries in science.
In advanced mathematics, our best math students outranked only one country (Austria), and in physics American students had the lowest scores of any nation tested.
In short, American students start ahead but fall behind in mathematics and science. U.S. elementary students can stand comparison with any nation's students, including those from Japan or Europe, but U.S. high school graduates are embarrassingly far behind the international averages.
International educational comparisons are difficult, of course, and they have often been criticized. A common criticism is that these studies compare average American students with the most talented students in other countries. Although this may have been a problem in several past studies, the international group designing TIMSS went to extraordinary lengths to combat this criticism by carefully selecting students at random from all parts of each country's educational system. In all, TIMSS involves more than half a million students in 41 countries.
Poking around in the TIMSS data gives us some interesting insights into our educational system as well as those of other countries. In science, for example, our students at all grade levels seem to do better in earth, life, and environmental science than they do in the physical sciences, including both chemistry and physics. These are the areas we must concentrate on to improve our international standing.
In mathematics, the weakest areas for our students include geometry, measurement, and proportionality. We do a somewhat better job teaching algebra, data analysis, probability, and calculus.
Why does our students' performance decline from grade 4 to grade 8 to grade 12? This is not an easy question to answer. It seems that at the lower grades our curriculum matches up well with the "international core curriculum," if such a thing exists. That is, there is at least a rough international consensus on what to teach in the lower grades, and our teachers teach it well.
By the eighth grade, however, our curriculum seems to become more differentiated than those of other countries. Some of our students aren't learning the material they need to learn, and those students are dragging down our results. This effect continues and intensifies through the high school years, but something else is happening as well, something which holds back the achievement even of our best students.
Our poor performance does not seem to be related to factors outside the classroom. TIMSS shows that performance is not closely correlated with the amount of homework students do, the amount of television they watch, whether they have jobs after school, or other social factors. In addition, TIMSS does not support the idea that good performance is linked to any particular teaching style, traditional or reformed. The availability of computers and calculators also does not appear closely related to performance.
The TIMSS data suggest that the problems with American science and mathematics education are deeply seated and not amenable to quick fixes. To be brief about it, U.S. education does not seem to be designed and organized for success. TIMSS seems to be telling us at least four things about what is needed for success:
As we continue our efforts to reform and improve U.S. education, the TIMSS data will provide us with a sharp contact with international reality. TIMSS tells us that many of our current disputes are peripheral to the real job, the job of unifying and focusing the curriculum and raising our expectations for our students. Over the coming years we'll often be saying, "Is this going to help? What does TIMSS say?"
Additional reports will be forthcoming. In particular, the U.S. TIMSS research center at Michigan State is preparing a key report, Facing the Consequences, drawing conclusions from TIMSS for U.S. education. The report is likely to be unsettling for everyone, traditionalists and reformers alike.
FEEDBACK: We'd be happy to have your comments and suggestions.
CMSE Online Front Page | Features Index
Earlier version posted July 2, 1997. Completely revised after release of the TIMSS 12th grade results and reposted February 27, 1998. Link to school boards journal added July 22, 1998. Features remain online as long as they remain current; they may be updated if new information becomes available.
Copyright © 1998, Center for Mathematics and Science Education. Teachers have permission to duplicate this page for use in teaching their own classes. All other rights reserved. You are welcome to link to this page, but do not copy its contents.
|
Center for Mathematics and Science
Education http://www.unc.edu/depts/cmse/MSEdNC/TIMSS.html |
CMSE Online Front
Page |
