Since 1988, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) at the (U.S.) National Research Council of the National Academies has engaged in activities designed to increase the rigor and sophistication of international comparative studies in education by encouraging synergies between large and smaller scale international comparative education research, to identify gaps in the existing research base, and to assist in communicating results to policy makers and the public. Under the current grant (1998-2002), funded by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, BICSE has sponsored public events and commissioned papers on the effects of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the power of video technology in international education research, international perspectives on teacher quality, and advances in the methodology of cross-national surveys of education achievement. This report responds to a request from the board's sponsors under the current grant to produce a report that builds on its previous work.
Since 1988, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) at the (U.S.) National Research Council of the National Academies has engaged in activities designed to increase the rigor and sophistication of international comparative studies in education by encouraging synergies between large and smaller scale international comparative education research, to identify gaps in the existing research base, and to assist in communicating results to policy makers and the public. Under the current grant (1998-2002), funded by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, BICSE has sponsored public events and commissioned papers on the effects of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the power of video technology in international education research, international perspectives on teacher quality, and advances in the methodology of cross-national surveys of education achievement. This report responds to a request from the board's sponsors under the current grant to produce a report that builds on its previous work.
Now that the initial results of The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) have been released, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) has turned its attention to what happens next. The TIMSS data are potentially useful to researchers, policy makers, practitioners, and others interested in evidence regarding factors that influence student learning. But although the study has produced a remarkable volume of intriguing data, it is by no means complete. Scholarly review of the initial data, evaluations of claims based on the data, and follow-up secondary analysis based on the primary findings are all integral parts of a study of this magnitude, but the bulk of this very important work has not yet begun. Because of the board's serious concern that this necessary work has not been undertaken, or funded, it held a workshop on June 17 and 18, 1998, to explore different perspectives on possible next steps. The workshop was an invaluable opportunity for the board to explore issues and questions it has addressed over the years and to solidify its thinking about many of them. Because the board is convinced of the importance of moving forward with the TIMSS data, it presents in this report both recommendations as to what ought to be done and many of the innovative specific ideas that emerged from the workshop. These recommendations reflect the board's conviction, based on its many years of involvement with and deliberations about TIMSS, that this study is an extremely rich resource for the policy, scholarly, and practice communities, and that all of these groups have a responsibility to take full advantage of it. The recommendations and discussion in this report are intended to assist both researchers and funders who are considering further work with TIMSS, and a broader audience of researchers, policy makers, practitioners, and others who have followed the TIMSS results and are eager to use them. This report is, in a sense, the culmination of many years of effort for the board.
In November 2000, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) held a symposium to draw on the wealth of experience gathered over a four-decade period, to evaluate improvement in the quality of the methodologies used in international studies, and to identify the most pressing methodological issues that remain to be solved. Since 1960, the United States has participated in 15 large-scale cross-national education surveys. The most assessed subjects have been science and mathematics through reading comprehension, geography, nonverbal reasoning, literature, French, English as a foreign language, civic education, history, computers in education, primary education, and second-language acquisition. The papers prepared for this symposium and discussions of those papers make up the volume, representing the most up-to-date and comprehensive assessment of methodological strengths and weaknesses of international comparative studies of student achievement. These papers answer the following questions: (1) What is the methodological quality of the most recent international surveys of student achievement? How authoritative are the results? (2) Has the methodological quality of international achievement studies improved over the past 40 years? and (3) What are promising opportunities for future improvement?
In 1996, the Board on International Comparative Studies of the National Research Council sponsored a workshop to assess what has been learned about making education standards internationally competitive and to examine why criteria for international competitiveness have been so difficult to articulate. A summary of the issues raised at this workshop is presented. Approximately 80 persons, including representatives from national organizations with specific interest in education standards, university researchers, and education policy makers attended the gathering. Participants explored the concept and the support of high standards for education in the United States. Even with widespread support, differences in how standards should be reached and used became apparent. The text examines standards as a political process and advises that standards be worked out in a public political forum. An understanding of the content and performance standards that are in place for high-achieving students around the world could inform a local search for standards. This is applicable to the United States, which should adapt its own standards to its own circumstances and goals. Implementing standards and including teachers in such movements help teachers to select the curricular topics that are most important. Three appendices feature a list of workshop participants, workshop papers, and other information. (RJM)
Amid current efforts to improve mathematics and science education in the United States, people often ask how these subjects are organized and taught in other countries. They hear repeatedly that other countries produce higher student achievement. Teachers and parents wonder about the answers to questions like these: Why do the children in Asian cultures seem to be so good at science and mathematics? How are biology and physics taught in the French curriculum? What are textbooks like elsewhere, and how much latitude do teachers have in the way they follow the texts? Do all students receive the same education, or are they grouped by ability or perceived educational promise? If students are grouped, how early is this done? What are tests like, and what are the consequences for students? Are other countries engaged in Standards-like reforms? Does anything like "standards" play a role in other countries? Questions such as these reflect more than a casual interest in other countries' educational practices. They grow out of an interest in identifying ways to improve mathematics and science education in the United States. The focus of this short report is on what the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), a major international investigation of curriculum, instruction, and learning in mathematics and science, will be able to contribute to understandings of mathematics and science education around the world as well as to current efforts to improve student learning, particularly in the United States.
Since 1988, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) at the (U.S.) National Research Council of the National Academies has engaged in activities designed to increase the rigor and sophistication of international comparative studies in education by encouraging synergies between large and smaller scale international comparative education research, to identify gaps in the existing research base, and to assist in communicating results to policy makers and the public. Under the current grant (1998-2002), funded by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics, BICSE has sponsored public events and commissioned papers on the effects of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the power of video technology in international education research, international perspectives on teacher quality, and advances in the methodology of cross-national surveys of education achievement. This report responds to a request from the board's sponsors under the current grant to produce a report that builds on its previous work.
Since the late 1960s, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)â€"the nation's report cardâ€"has been the only continuing measure of student achievement in key subject areas. Increasingly, educators and policymakers have expected NAEP to serve as a lever for education reform and many other purposes beyond its original role. Grading the Nation's Report Card examines ways NAEP can be strengthened to provide more informative portrayals of student achievement and the school and system factors that influence it. The committee offers specific recommendations and strategies for improving NAEP's effectiveness and utility, including: Linking achievement data to other education indicators. Streamlining data collection and other aspects of its design. Including students with disabilities and English-language learners. Revamping the process by which achievement levels are set. The book explores how to improve NAEP framework documentsâ€"which identify knowledge and skills to be assessedâ€"with a clearer eye toward the inferences that will be drawn from the results. What should the nation expect from NAEP? What should NAEP do to meet these expectations? This book provides a blueprint for a new paradigm, important to education policymakers, professors, and students, as well as school administrators and teachers, and education advocates.
Video technology offers a number of important potential benefits to researchers and policy makers interested in international comparative research. However, a number of practical and methodological issues remain to be addressed, including sample sizes and the confidentiality of research participants. In light of the potential benefits and recognizing the unresolved issues, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) offers four recommendations to researchers, funding agencies, and policy makers.
To explore the connections between new approaches to science education and new developments in assessment, the Board on Testing and Assessment (BOTA) of the National Research Council (NRC) sponsored a two-day conference on February 22 and 23, 1997. Participants included BOTA members, other measurement experts, and educators and policymakers concerned with science education reform. The conference encouraged the exchange of ideas between those with measurement expertise and those with creative approaches to instruction and assessment.
Collaborations of physicians and researchers with industry can provide valuable benefits to society, particularly in the translation of basic scientific discoveries to new therapies and products. Recent reports and news stories have, however, documented disturbing examples of relationships and practices that put at risk the integrity of medical research, the objectivity of professional education, the quality of patient care, the soundness of clinical practice guidelines, and the public's trust in medicine. Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice provides a comprehensive look at conflict of interest in medicine. It offers principles to inform the design of policies to identify, limit, and manage conflicts of interest without damaging constructive collaboration with industry. It calls for both short-term actions and long-term commitments by institutions and individuals, including leaders of academic medical centers, professional societies, patient advocacy groups, government agencies, and drug, device, and pharmaceutical companies. Failure of the medical community to take convincing action on conflicts of interest invites additional legislative or regulatory measures that may be overly broad or unduly burdensome. Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice makes several recommendations for strengthening conflict of interest policies and curbing relationships that create risks with little benefit. The book will serve as an invaluable resource for individuals and organizations committed to high ethical standards in all realms of medicine.
Video technology offers a number of important potential benefits to researchers and policy makers interested in international comparative research. However, a number of practical and methodological issues remain to be addressed, including sample sizes and the confidentiality of research participants. In light of the potential benefits and recognizing the unresolved issues, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) offers four recommendations to researchers, funding agencies, and policy makers.
The Index of Majors and Graduate Degrees, 1996 lets students explore 600 majors and discover which colleges offer them. The guide includes all degree levels--associate through doctorate--plus brief descriptions of each major.
The all-new 20th annual edition of this reference for undergraduate and graduate students who need to know which colleges offer the majors they want covers 600 fields of study--at every degree level from associate through doctoral--with complete descriptions of each.
This is the only guide available that contains objective information on every accredited college in the United States — 2,150 four-year colleges and universities, and 1,650 two-year community colleges and technical schools. With its clearly laid-out entries and more than 40 indexes, the College Handbook 2011 is the fastest, easiest way for students to narrow a college search and compare the schools that they’re interested in. • Targeted information for home-schooled students and students considering community college as an option. • Useful features for black and Hispanic students. • Tables of early decision and wait-list outcomes show information that can’t be found in any other guide. • Comprehensive listings of student services, majors, athletics, on-campus activities and campus computing. • Planning calendar and worksheets help students organize their applications and stay on track. • Purchasers qualify for a $10 discount on The Official SAT Online Course™, the only course offered by the test makers. • Updated annually by a team of editors who verify information with each college — making the College Handbook 2011 the best college reference guide.
This essential guide helps readers find the colleges with the major they want at the degree level they need. With The College Board Index of Majors and Graduate Degrees, 2002 students can determine which of the 600 majors is right for them and which colleges offer that major.
Students can explore the wide range of available majors and find out what colleges offer them in this state-by-state listing. Indicates six levels at which degrees may be earned, including associate, masters, and doctoral, and contains lists of special college programs such as studying abroad.
In November 2000, the Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) held a symposium to draw on the wealth of experience gathered over a four-decade period, to evaluate improvement in the quality of the methodologies used in international studies, and to identify the most pressing methodological issues that remain to be solved. Since 1960, the United States has participated in 15 large-scale cross-national education surveys. The most assessed subjects have been science and mathematics through reading comprehension, geography, nonverbal reasoning, literature, French, English as a foreign language, civic education, history, computers in education, primary education, and second-language acquisition. The papers prepared for this symposium and discussions of those papers make up the volume, representing the most up-to-date and comprehensive assessment of methodological strengths and weaknesses of international comparative studies of student achievement. These papers answer the following questions: (1) What is the methodological quality of the most recent international surveys of student achievement? How authoritative are the results? (2) Has the methodological quality of international achievement studies improved over the past 40 years? and (3) What are promising opportunities for future improvement?
An easy-to-use reference for students who know what they want to study, but not where. Completely revised and cross-referenced, this edition lists over 500 undergraduate and graduate majors and the colleges, state-by-state, currently offering them--based on information provided by 3,000 institutions of higher learning.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.