News & Views item - February 2007

 

 

National Standards and National Assessments of Student Achievement in Science and Maths and National Certification for Teachers in Those Fields. (February 2, 2007)

    A call to arms by Australia's Minister for Education, Science and Training, Julie Bishop?  No, it's a panel reporting to the policymaking body that oversees the National Science Foundation which finds, "Currently, we have [US] states adopting less-than-rigorous standards to game the system," says Shirley Malcom, co-chair of the National Science Board's Commission on 21st Century Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics and the head of education and human resources programs at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. "As a nation, we need to drive a stake in the ground and say this cannot go on."

 

 Credit: Source National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), Mississippi Department of Education; Photos.Com

 

 

The US' No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act requires states to assess what their students have learned. To do so, each state developed its own standards and tests. The chart above shows the marked discrepancy between how the state of Mississippi assessed the mathematics competence of its 4th and 8th grade students in comparison to the assessment made by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. On the basis of the discrepancy Mississippi earned a "cream puff" award from an education journal published by Stanford's Hoover Institution.

 

Science reports, "The [Bush] Administration maintains its commitment to local control [of public education] and supports state development of content standards and assessments," says Chad Colby, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Education.

 

Adds Jacque Johnson of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: "We are not encouraging consideration of national standards because it would become a distraction from moving forward on reauthorizing NCLB this year...

    "[However, l]ast month, two [US] legislators long active in education reform--Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI)--introduced a bill to create and implement a set of voluntary national standards in math and science."

 

The Dodd-Ehlers legislation "would provide states with a financial incentive to adopt voluntary national standards developed by the National Assessments Governing Board, which oversees the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The legislation creates a US$400 million fund that would provide competitive grants to interested states for implementing the core standards and then reward states that do.
    "Dodd and Ehlers argue that it will not only improve the quality of science and math education but also help the country deliver on its promise of equal opportunity. 'As a result of varied standards, exams, and proficiency levels, America's highly mobile student-aged population moves through the nation's schools gaining widely varying levels of knowledge, skills, and preparedness,' Dodd says. 'Voluntary, core American standards [will ensure] that all American students are given the same opportunity to learn to a high standard no matter where they reside.'"

 

Washington observers warn the Dodd-Ehlers bill will face a difficult passage but a congressional aide told Science, "We have a window of opportunity now with rising concern about America's performance in math and science and the buzz around national competitiveness. States are realizing that they must improve science and math education in order to attract high-paying jobs."

 

It's interesting to note the difference in approach being attempted by Dodd and Ehlers as well as the difference emphasis by National Science Board's Commission in comparison to that taken by Australia's Coalition government through Julie Bishop.

 

She told the Committee for Economic Development of Australia in Brisbane yesterday, "I am concerned that students, teachers and parents are being let down as many aspects of school education get hijacked by teachers unions and state education bureaucrats...Instead of learning basic facts in subjects like history, children are being taught according to an ideological agenda....The problem is the growing number of students at the tail end who don't have the fundamental skills to even hold down a job."

 

The 136 page review, Year 12 curriculum content and achievement standards, January 2007, prepared for the Minister by Gabrielle Matters and Geoff Masters, Australian Council for Educational Research,  indicates that as far as curricula go there is a high degree of similarity between all states and territories:

 

An analysis of these high-level mathematics curricula reveals a high degree of consistency across the eight jurisdictions. Approximately 90 per cent of the content of these high-level courses is common across states and territories.
 
In Chemistry and Physics, there is a high degree of consistency in the kinds of achievements and features of student work that are assessed in the senior school, consistent with the high degree of commonality in Chemistry and Physics curriculum content.
 
[I]n spite of the occasionally high level of variability in language used across jurisdictions, there appears to be a high degree of consistency in requirements for topics to be studied and skills to be developed in all of the subjects with the exception of English. The phenomenon of pervasive themes with unpredictable variations on those themes (such as in the way electives are used) is expanded upon during this report.

The study also assessed the level of achievement attained by the year 12 students in the five subjects examined:

Across Australia, in all five subjects, there is a degree of consistency in what is looked for when assessing students’ achievements. In any given subject, states and territories tend to pay attention to the same kinds of achievements and features of student work (eg, a student’s ability to ‘use evidence to support a point of view’).

In Chemistry and Physics, there is a high degree of consistency in the kinds of achievements and features of student work that are assessed in the senior school, consistent with the high degree of commonality in Chemistry and Physics curriculum content.

In Mathematics, despite the commonality of curriculum content in high-level courses, there are some significant differences in what is required to achieve the highest available grade in advanced mathematics. Some jurisdictions require students to demonstrate mastery of a broader range of mathematical content; some appear to require higher levels of mathematical sophistication.

In Australian History, the assessed features of student work reflect the contextual approach to the teaching of this subject across Australia, meaning that what tend to be valued and assessed are students’ skills of historical inquiry and critical analysis.

In English (including Literature), although all assessment regimes require students to demonstrate an understanding of texts and the ability to generate texts, there is considerable choice across the country in what those texts can be. There is no consistent explication of what jurisdictions assess in the subject English, although common words are used to describe requirements of student work if it is to be awarded the highest available grade (eg, clear, critical, refined/sophisticated, complex, sustained/fluent, extensive, precise, skilful, insightful, detailed).

On the face of it the states and territories appear to be doing a good job.

 

One might ask how Senator Dodd and Representative Ehlers as well as the US National Science Board's Commission on 21st Century Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics would react to such an evaluation of the 50 United States had it been presented

 

So just what is the raison d'etre for Minister Bishop's carry on.

 

All in all Nicholson's cartoon in today's Australian looks to sum up matters rather well.

 

Would the unification of the education systems under strict federal control really be an advantage? Interestingly, Ms Bishop has given no evidence that that is the case. And that from the minister who has berated Bob Birrell for not fingering the specific individuals who have reduced requirements so that foreign students might gain degrees. 

 

That doesn't mean that there can't be improvements in the states' primary and secondary educational systems but it would seem far more effective to work with them rather than the repeated proscriptive bullying by the Minister. So just what is the agenda of the government and Ms Bishop?

 

Meanwhile the real and of course difficult issues of  the recruitment and support of competent teachers and those who are designated to teach them are for all practical purposes ignored.