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.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
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.”
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
National Academies of Science. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Academies of Science. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm. Revisited. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: the imperative for educational reform. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
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.
National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington: National Science Foundation.
National Science Board. (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2012. Arlington: National Science Foundation.
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.
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.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
OECD. (2007). Economic survey of the United States 2007. Paris: OECD publishing.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results (volume I): excellence and equity in education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Ravitch, D. (1990). Education in the 1980’s: a concern for ‘Quality’. Education Week, 9(16), 48 Retrieved from http://www.rfwp.com/.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Stedman, L. C. (1994). The Sandia report and U.S. achievement: an assessment. Journal of Educational Research, 87(3), 133–146.
Suter, L. E. (1993). Indicators of Science & Mathematics Education 1992. Arlington: Publisher: National Science Foundation.
Suter, L. E. (Ed.). (1996). Indicators of Mathematics and Science Education: 1996. Arlington: National Science Foundation.
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.
U.S. Department of Education. (2008). A nation accountable: twenty-five years after a nation at risk. Washington, D.C.: Department of Education.
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
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
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
About this article
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
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9746-0