International Comparative Research in Mathematics Education

  • David Clarke

Abstract

International comparative research is reviewed from the perspectives of methodology, implicit value systems, best practice, and mutuality of benefit. The evaluative/competitive emphasis of recent international comparative research is problematised on grounds of contextual (especially cultural) comparability and existing research reports are examined from an analytical perspective that emphasises the cultural specificity of not only the interpretation of data but of its potential to inform policy and practice. Central to the effective conduct and utilisation of international comparative research are considerations of ‘cultural authorship’ and ‘adaptive potential’. We study the mathematics classrooms of other countries not primarily for the purpose of adopting or even of adapting their practices but for the capacity of such research to support us in our reflection on our own practice. International comparative research must be collaboratively constituted and interpreted by each society in terms of the needs, goals, and resources pertaining to their own educational system.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, R. (2000). Culture & Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, L. W., Ryan, D., & Shapiro, B. (1989). The IEA classroom environment study. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson-Levitt, K. M. (2002). Teaching culture as national and transnational: A response to teachers’ work. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 19–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (1996). Changing the Subject: Innovations in Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education. London and Paris: Routledge and the OECD (cited in Atkin and Black, 1997).Google Scholar
  5. Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (1997). Policy perils of international comparisons. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 22–28.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, D. P. (1997). Surviving TIMSS or, everything you blissfully forgot about international comparisons. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, December issue, 295–300.Google Scholar
  7. Barnes, M., Clarke, D. J., & Stephens, W. M. (2000). Assessment as the engine of systemic reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(5), 623–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Battista, M. T. (1999). Geometry results from the third international mathematics and science study. Teaching Children Mathematics, 5, February issue, 367–373.Google Scholar
  9. Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. I., Kelly, D. I., & Smith, T. A. (1996). Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  10. Beaton, A. E., & Robitaille, D. F. (1999). An overview of the third international mathematics and science study. Chapter 3. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna & I. Huntley (Eds.), International Comparisons in Mathematics Education (pp. 19–29). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  11. Beller, M., & Gafni, N. (1996). The 1991 International Assessment of Educational Progress in Mathematics and Sciences: The Gender Differences Perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(2), 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bracey, G. W. (1997). On comparing the incomparable: A response to Baker and Stedman. Educational Researcher, 26(4), 19–26.Google Scholar
  13. Bracey, G. W. (1998). TIMSS, rhymes with ‘dims’, as in ‘witted’. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, May issue, 686–687.Google Scholar
  14. Campbell, P. F., & Silver, E. A. (1999). Teaching and Learning Mathematics in Poor Communities. Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  15. Cheng, Y. C., & Cheung, W. M. (1999). Lessons from TIMSS in Europe: An observation from Asia. Educational Research and Evaluation, 5(2), 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clarke, D. J. (1996). Assessment. Chapter 9, in A. Bishop (Ed.), International Handbook of Mathematics Education (pp. 327–370). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  17. Clarke, D. J. (Ed.) (2001). Perspectives on Practice and Meaning in Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Clarke, D. J. (2002). The learner’s perspective study: Exploiting the potential for complementary analyses. Paper presented as part of the symposium ‘Primary Research, Secondary Research and Research Synthesis: Theory, Value and Linkage’ at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 2–5, 2002. Copies available at http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/DSlvlfi/rescarch/lps.
  19. Cohen, D. (1998). World league tables: What’s the score? Principal Matters, 10(1), 3–7.Google Scholar
  20. Forgione, P. D. (1998). Responses to frequently asked questions about 12th-grade TIMSS. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, June issue, 769–772.Google Scholar
  21. Freudenthal, H. (1975). Pupils’ achievements internationally compared — the IEA. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 6, 127–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuller, B., & Clarke, P. (1994). Raising school effects while ignoring culture? Local conditions and the influence of classroom tools, rules, and pedagogy. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 119–157.Google Scholar
  23. Garden, R. A. (1999). Development of the TIMSS performance assessment tasks. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 25(3), 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gombrich, E. H. (1995). The Story of Art. Fifteenth Edition. London: Phaidon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gough, P. B. (1997). Call of the horse race. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 178.Google Scholar
  26. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1998). Cultural contexts of schooling revisited: A review of the learning gap from a cultural psychology perspective. Chapter 3. In S. G. Paris & H. M. Wellman (Eds.), Global Prospects for Education: Development, Culture and Schooling (pp. 79–104). Washington, D. C.; American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hess, R. D., & Azuma, H. (1991). Cultural support for schooling: Contrasts between Japan and the United States. Educational Researcher, 20(9), 2–8, 12.Google Scholar
  28. Hu, A. (2000, December). TIMSS: Arthur Hu’s index. [On line] Available: http://www.leconsulting.com/arthurhu/index/timss.htm. (December 30, 2000). Cited in Wang (2001).
  29. Kaiser, G., Luna, E., & Huntley, J. (Eds.) (1999). International Comparisons in Mathematics Education. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kawanaka, T., & Stigler, J. W. (1999). Teachers’ use of questions in eighth-grade mathematics classrooms in Germany, Japan, and the United State s. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1 (4), 255–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keeves, J. P. (1995). The case for international comparisons. Chapter 10. In I. L. Lane (Ed.), Ferment in Education: A Look Abroad (pp. 169–189). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Keitel, C., & Kilpatrick, J. (1999). The rationality and irrationality of international comparative studies. Chapter 16. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna & I. Huntley (Eds.), International Comparison s in Mathematics Education (pp. 241–256). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lather, P. (1999). To be of use: The work of reviewing. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 2–7.Google Scholar
  34. LeTendre, G., Baker, D., Akiba, M., Goesling, B., & Wiseman, A. (2001). Teachers’ work: Institutional isomorphism and cultural variation in the U.S., Germany, and Japan. Educational Researcher, 30(6), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. LeTendre, G., Baker, D., Akiba, M., Goesling, B., & Wiseman, A. (2002). Response to K. AndersonLevitt’s rejoinder. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 22–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lokan, J. (1999). Equity issues in testing: The case of TIMSS performance assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 25, 297–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lokan, J., Ford, P., & Greenwood, L. (1996). Maths and Science on the Line: Australian Junior Secondary Students’ Performance in the Third International Math ematics and Science Study. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  38. Lokan, J., Ford, P., & Greenwood, L. (1997). Maths and Science on the Line: Australian Middle Primary Students’ Performance in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  39. Lokan, J., & Greenwood, L. (2001). Maths and Science on the Line: Australian Year 12 Students’ Performance in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Melbourne: ACER.Google Scholar
  40. Mislevy, R. J. (1995). What can we learn from international assessments? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(4), 419–437.Google Scholar
  41. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Beaton, A. E., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1998). Mathematics and Science Achievement in the Final Year of Secondary School: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  42. Orpwood, G. W. F., & Garden, R. A. (1998). Assessing Mathematics and Science Literacy. Vancouver: Pacific Educational Press.Google Scholar
  43. Raby, R. L. (2000). Comparative and international education: A bibliography (1999). Comparative Education Review, 44(3), 381–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rose, L. C. (1998). Who cares? And so what? Guest editorial in Phi Delta Kappan, 79, June issue, 722, 800.Google Scholar
  45. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). Confessions of an accidental theorist. For the Learning of Mathematics, 7(1), 30–38.Google Scholar
  46. Scholle, D. (1992). Authority on the left: Critical pedagogy, postmodernism and vital strategies. Cultural Studies, 6(2), 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmidt, W. H., Jorde, D., Cogan, L S., Barrier, E., Gonzalo, I., Moser, U., Shimizu, K., Sawada, T., Valverde, G. A., McKnight, C, Prawat, R. S., Wiley, D. E., Raizen, S. A., Britton, E. D., & Wolfe, R. G. (1996). Characterizing Pedagogical Flow: An Investigation of Mathematics and Science Teaching in Six Coumries. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  48. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A Splintered Vision: An Investigation of U.S Science and Mathematics Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  49. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Valverde, G. A., Houang, R. T., & Wiley, D. E. (1997). Many Visions, Many Aims. Volume 1: A Cross–National Investigation of Curricular Intentions in School Mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (1995). Intercultural Communication: A discourse approach. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  51. Shimahara, N., & Sakai, A. (1995). Learning to Teach in Two Cultures. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  52. Shimizu, Y. (1999). Studying sample lessons rather than one excellent lesson: A Japanese perspective on the TIMSS video tape classroom study. Zentralblatt für Didactikder Mathematik, 6, 191–195Google Scholar
  53. Shimizu, Y. (2002a). Capturing the structure of Japanese mathematics lessons: Some findings of the international comparative studies. Paper presented at the ICMI-Second East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education and Ninth Southeast Asian Conference on Mathematics Education, 27–31 May 2002, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University,Google Scholar
  54. Singapore (From http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu).au/DSME/research/lps.
  55. Shimizu, Y. (2002b). Discrepancies in perception s of lesson structure between the teacher and the students in the mathematics classroom. Paper presented at the interactive symposium, ‘International Perspectives on Mathematics Classrooms’, at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 1–5, 2002. Copies available at http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/DSME/research/lps.
  56. Spindler, G. (1987). Cultural dialogue and schooling in Schoenhausen and Roseville: A comparative analysis. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18(1), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stedman, L. C. (1997). International achievement differences: An assessment of a new perspective. Educational Researcher, 26(3), 4–15.Google Scholar
  58. Ste venson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The Learning Gap: Why Our Schools Are Failing and What We Can Learn from Japanese and Chinese Education. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
  59. Stigler, J., Gallimore, R., & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding an d improving classroom mathematics instruction: An overview of the TIMSS video study. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 14–21.Google Scholar
  61. Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  62. Tarr, J. E., Mittag, K. C., Uekawa, K., & Lennex, L. (2000). A comparison of calcula to ruse in eighth-grade mathematics classrooms in the United States, Japan, and Portugal: Result s from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. School Science and Mathematics, 100(3), 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thomas, R. M. (Ed.) (1990). International Comparative Education: Practices. Issues. and Prospects. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  64. Thorsten, M. (2000). Once upon a TIMSS: American and Japanese narrations of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Education and Society, 18(3), 45–76.Google Scholar
  65. Tobin, J., Wu, D., & Davidson, D. (1989). Preschools in Three Cultures: Japan, China and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  66. U.S. Department of Education (1997). Attaining Excellence: TIMSS as a Starting Point to Examine U.S. Education. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  67. Van den Heuvl-Panhuizen, M. (1998). Gender differences in mathematics achievements in Dutch primary schools: On the search for features of mathematics education that are important for girls. In C. Keitel (Ed.), Social Justice and Mathematics Education: Gender, Class, Ethnicity and the Politics of Schooling (pp. 135–149). Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin & IOWME.Google Scholar
  68. Wang, J. (1998). International achievement comparison: Interesting debates on inconclusive findings. School Science and Mathematics, 98(7), 376–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wang, J. (2001). TIMSS primary and middle school data: Some technical concerns. Educational Researcher, 30(6), 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Watanabe, T. (2001). Content and organization of teacher’s manuals: An analysis of Japanese elementary mathematics teacher’s manuals. School Science and Mathematics, 101(4), 194– 201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Webb, N. L. (1997). Determining alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. NISE Brief, 1(2), 1–8.Google Scholar
  72. Westbury, I. (1992). Comparing American and Japanese achievement: Is the United States really alow achiever? Educational Resarcher, June–July, pp. 18–24.Google Scholar
  73. Westbury I., Ethington C.A., Sosniak L.A., & Baker D.P. (Eds.) (1994). In Search of More Effective Mathematics Education: Examining Data from the IEA Second International Mathematics Study. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  74. White, M. (1987). The Japanese Educational Challenge: A Commitment to Children. New York: The Free Press. Cited in Watanabe (2001).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Clarke
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations