Press Statement

Press Statement - November 20, 1996 Horizontal Rule

Remarks by Dr. Neal Lane
Director, National Science Foundation

At a Press Conference to Release Student Achievement Results of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study

(As delivered)

In reviewing the data from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, one obvious question that arises is "What are the surprises?" The most obvious answer, it seems to me, is that there really are none.

I wish there were. We, as a nation, are short of pleasant surprises when it comes to science and mathematics education.

Unfortunately, what the data tell us is that given the kinds of activities and learning that commonly take place in most American classrooms without substantial changes, the U.S. is unlikely to achieve its national education goal of becoming first in the world in math and science. We simply cannot afford to fail to meet that challenge.

Put another way, maintaining the status quo locally simply will not put us on the leading edge globally.

This worries me. It should worry us all.

Education is an important part of NSF's mission. We support an array of research into effective practice at all levels of the educational system. Our most ambitious efforts are to reshape K-12 science and math education in whole states and major urban areas nationwide. Many of the basic commitments that we require from those who wish to participate in these "systemic" initiatives echo the "best practices'' of high-achieving nations in the TIMSS study.

For example, if all students, not just a select few, are asked to master challenging math and science content--if the bar is set high enough, if you will--we find that all students will, in fact, strive to achieve at the higher level.

If the school day is reconfigured and the curriculum refocused so that teachers are adequately supported and are given the time to teach well, and in-depth, and are encouraged themselves to continually improve their skills and knowledge, then both students and teachers benefit.

If students are grouped according to the expectation that some can learn challenging math and science and others cannot, then those expectations are likely to be fulfilled. Fortunately, as we have found in many of our "systemic" reform sites--from Detroit to Louisiana to Puerto Rico--the opposite also is true. All students can rise to the challenge. Indeed, we cannot expect them to do well unless they are challenged.

From A Splintered Vision, a report which NSF released last month here as part of TIMSS, we discovered that the 8th grade U.S. curriculum, when compared with curriculums abroad, lacks focus and is packed with information, almost guaranteeing that no one topic can be taught in depth. We also learned that U.S. teachers have far less time to think about what they teach and how best to teach it.

Today, we may infer from the TIMSS achievement findings that this classroom cacophony is in large measure responsible for the middling U.S. TIMSS results.

As a physicist, I find it disturbing that mathematicians who reviewed videotapes of U.S. math lessons saw essentially no high quality math taught at all. Sadly, they found, in fact, that 87 percent of the math taught was of low quality.

By way of comparison, 30 percent of the math taught by Japanese teachers and 23 percent of the math in the Germany lessons was deemed high quality. Only 13 percent of the math taught in the Japanese lessons was judged to be of low quality. That is an extraordinary spread in how mathematics is taught.

I don't think it's surprising, then, that although U.S. students place around or above the international average in subjects like environmental science, they are far from standouts when it comes to the so-called "hard sciences'' of chemistry and physics--those solidly grounded in math--exactly the kinds of subjects they should be mastering.

Teachers and students alike should be expected to, and permitted to, "exercise their minds.'' Too often, they are rewarded for being intellectual "couch potatoes."

We also must conclude from A Splintered Vision and these most recent findings that U.S. students reap the consequences of our failure to put a premium on good teaching.

One seemingly trivial demonstration of this lack of respect and support for teachers stands out in my mind. Although the TIMSS report does not examine the impact of technology on learning, I joked recently that at least one technological advance definitely is hindering learning here in the U.S. In viewing the TIMSS videotapes, the researchers were struck by the fact that the voice from the classroom loudspeaker, blaring out in the midst of teachers' lessons, was the single most intrusive problem in the classroom.

A country that respects and dignifies the teaching profession simply could not and would not allow this to happen. And it doesn't take money to fix it.

TIMSS is a baseline against which future studies can be judged. We at NSF know a lot about what works in the classroom and have begun to accumulate evidence to support those conclusions. We are happy to share the lessons we've learned.

Horizontal Rule

Top of Document

search

site map

NSF

OLPA

Questions

Forward