Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

International Student Achievement Comparisons and US STEM Workforce Development

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Comparisons of US student achievement to other countries, conducted since the 1960s, have received extensive media coverage in the USA. Policy studies have cited these comparisons as evidence that the quality of US educational performance in mathematics and science requires federal intervention. Policy makers have been particularly concerned that the US economy would be impacted by inadequate student achievement levels especially in technology-related industries. This paper explores evidence about whether policy makers react to the citations of international student achievement rankings by changing funding levels for educational research and whether the studies have motivated the nation’s educators to support a trend toward common educational standards.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Whitman (2015a) notes the conservative origination of the Common Core State Standards during the tenures of secretaries William Bennett (1985–1988) and Lamar Alexander (1991–1993) at the US Department of Education. According to Whitman (2015b), Bennett wrote “curriculum guides” for elementary and secondary schools, which were published by the DOE. Whitman continued, “If Alexander can lay claim to being the original political godfather of the Common Core State Standards, his assistant secretary at the department, Diane Ravitch, is their intellectual godmother.”

  2. More information is available at http://www.corestandards.org/other-resources/ and Conley (2014). Interestingly, Conley (p. 1) wrote “The Common Core State Standards are a response to the new realities of the US economy.”

  3. The TIMMS predecessors included the First International Mathematics Study (FIMS) in 1964, and the Second International Mathematics Study (SIMS) in 1981–1982. Other international assessments were conducted during this time (e.g., International Assessment of Student Progress, Kassel Project). See Dossey and Wu (2012) for a more complete history. In the TIMSS studies beginning in 1995, instructional processes and curricula of participating countries were surveyed as well as student achievement.

References

  • Achieve, The Education Trust, & The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. (2004). Ready or not: creating a high school diploma that counts. Washington, DC: American Diploma Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and educational reform: What planners need to know. Paris: United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation.

  • Carson, C. C., Huelskamp, R. M., & Woodall, T. D. (1993). Perspectives on education in America: an annotated briefing. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(5), 259–265 267-291, 293-297, 299-307, 309-310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, D. (2014). The common core state standards: Insight into their development and purpose. Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, D.C. https://www.inflexion.org/ccss-development-andpurpose.

  • Dossey, J. A., & Wu, M. L. (2012). Implications of International Studies for National and Local. In A. J. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K.-S. Leung (Eds.), Third International Handbook of Mathematics Education (pp. 1009–1042). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, E. B. (1982). Reagan record in Education. New York Times, 39.

  • Guthrie, J. W., & Springer, M. G. (2004). A nation at risk revisited: Did “Wrong” reasoning result in “Right” results? At what cost? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(1), 7–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A. (2016). Education and the nation’s future. In G. P. Schltz (Ed.), Blueprint for America (pp. 89–108). Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hechinger, F. W. (1967). The U.S. gets low marks in math. New York Times, pp. 1, 12.

  • Komatsu, H., & Rappeleye, J. (2017). A new global policy regime founded on invalid statistics? Hanushek, Woessmann, PISA, and economic growth. Comparative Education, 53(2), 166–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: background, federal policy, and legislative action. Congressional Research Service Reports, 35 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/crsdocs/35.

  • Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in science. Chestnut Hill: Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. A. (1991). Report questioning ‘Crisis’ in education triggers an uproar. Education Week.

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international mathematics report. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Science. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Science. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm. Revisited. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: the imperative for educational reform. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers (NGA Center and CCSSO). (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Common Core state standards. Washington, D.C.: NGA Center and CCSSO. Accessed 30 Aug 2017 from http://www.corestandards.org.

  • National Science Board. (2001). A history of highlights 1950–2000. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation Retrieved from: https://nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2000/nsb00215/nsb00215.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (NSF). (2016). FY 2017 Budget Request to Congress. NSF Budget Requests and Appropriations by Account: FY 2000-FY 2017. https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2017/index.jsp. Accessed 20 Aug 2017.

  • National Science Foundation (NSF). (2018). 2019 Budget Request to Congress. https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2019/index.jsp.

  • Nelson, D. (2002). Using TIMSS to inform policy and practice at the local level. Graduate School of Education: CPRE Policy Briefs University of Pennsylvania.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • NGA & CCSSO. (n.d.). Public License. Downloaded 5–6-2018 from http://www.corestandards.org/public-license/.

  • NGA, CCSSO, and Achieve. (2008). Benchmarking for success: Ensuring U.S, Students receive a world-class education. Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2007). Economic survey of the United States 2007. Paris: OECD publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (volume I): excellence and equity in education. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (1990). Education in the 1980’s: a concern for ‘Quality’. Education Week, 9(16), 48 Retrieved from http://www.rfwp.com/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salzman, H., & Lowell, L. (2008). Making the grade. Nature, 453, 28–30 Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7191/full/453028a.html.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C., Valverde, G. A., Houang, R. T., & Wiley, D. E. (1997). Many visions, many aims, v. 1: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2012). Curricular coherence and the common core state standards for mathematics. Educational Researcher 41(8), 294–308.

  • Schmidt, W. H., Wang, H. A., & McKnight, C. C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: an examination of US mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(5), 525–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Pelligrino, J. W. (2013). Using learning and motivation theories to coherently link formative assessment, grading practices, and large-scale assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37(1), 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. (2010). Do we need more scientists? A long-term view of patterns of participation in UK undergraduate science programmes. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(3), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2010.502886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. S., & O’Day, J. (1991). Putting the pieces together: Systemic school reform (CPRE Policy Brief, RB-06-4/91). New Brunswick: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stedman, L. C. (1994). The Sandia report and U.S. achievement: an assessment. Journal of Educational Research, 87(3), 133–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suter, L. E. (1993). Indicators of Science & Mathematics Education 1992. Arlington: Publisher: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suter, L. E. (Ed.). (1996). Indicators of Mathematics and Science Education: 1996. Arlington: National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamim, A. (2007). Education at risk: fallout from a flawed report. Edutopia, retrieved 10-1-2017 from https://www.edutopia.org/landmark-education-report-nation-risk.

  • Tietelbaum, M. S. (2014). Falling behind? Boom, bust, and the global race for scientific talent. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education. (2008). A nation accountable: twenty-five years after a nation at risk. Washington, D.C.: Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, D. (2015a.) The surprising roots of the common core: How conservatives gave rise to ‘Obamacore’. Washington, D.C.: Brown Center on Education Policy. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Surprising-Conservative-Roots-of-the-Common-Core_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2018.

  • Whitman, D. (2015b). The GOP doesn’t want to leave any child behind—just the Obama programs that might help them. Hechinger Report

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Larry E. Suter.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suter, L.E., Camilli, G. International Student Achievement Comparisons and US STEM Workforce Development. J Sci Educ Technol 28, 52–61 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9746-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9746-0

Keywords

Navigation