CFE in the News:Taking Science to School
(2007) cited as basis for establishing a National Research and DevelopmentCenter on Cognition and
Science Instruction
Bringing together
national, state, and local leaders to address critical issues in
education research, policy, and practice.
Education Colleague:
We are pleased to provide you the latest highlights and resources
from the Center for Education at the National Academies.
At
the forefront of American policy rhetoric today is a resurgence of
interest in "evidence." The Center for Education promotes
the role of research and scientific evidence in guiding change in
education policy, programs and practice and has been a contributor to
the ongoing debate about scientific research in education. With new
mandates guiding the school reform agenda, the issues surrounding
scientific evidence in education have become all the more
significant. The National
Academies' Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
(DBASSE), in which the Center is housed, has recently launched a
study to focus on the issues around what is meant by evidence not
only in education but also in criminal justice, public health,
environmental protection, national security, demographic change, and
economic competitiveness. You'll find more
information on this study below.
The Center for Education regularly holds public workshops and
forums to bring available evidence to policy discussions. This past
quarter the Center held a workshop examining the available evidence
about future skill demands. You will find more
information on this workshop below.
As always, further information and resources on these projects and
our other recent work can be found on our website.
With
support form the W.T. Grant Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, the Hewlett
Foundation, and the National Science Foundation, the National Academies'
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE) has
established a new Standing Committee on Social Science Evidence for Use
to give sustained attention to issues of research quality and utility and
to identify actions aimed at promoting high quality social science with an
eye toward evidence-informed decision-making. The committee will initiate
and host interdisciplinary activities designed to: 1) build bridges between
high quality research and the appropriate and realistic uses of research
evidence to guide decision making; 2) tackle the conceptual and practical
issues in setting evidentiary standards for applied research; 3) identify
opportunities to improve professional training in applied behavioral and
social science; 4) foster partnerships between DBASSE, the National
Academies, and outside organizations concerned with related issues; and 5)
advance a culture of improved research, communication, diffusion, and
understanding of opportunities and barriers for utilization of research in
public policy. The Center for Education (CFE), housed within DBASSE, is
participating in this study to address how research evidence can best contribute
to improved decisions regarding education policy and practice. Click
here for more information on the study including the agenda of the
committee's most recent meeting.
The Committee
to Review the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays International Education Programs
was charged with reviewing the international education and foreign language
programs authorized under Title VI of the Higher Education Act and section
102(b)(6) of the Fulbright-Hays Act. For
more information on the study, click here. They reviewed all available
evidence, including extant evaluations, public testimony, funding history,
program monitoring data, and other program information. Committee members
also conducted a series of eight site visits to Universities with program
funding. The committee used this evidence to present its findings,
conclusions, and recommendations in each of eight areas specified by
Congress. The report was delivered to Congress and the Department of
Education on March 23, with a webcast public
release on March 27, 2007. An audiotape of the briefing (as well as the
press release) is available
online.
The committee's report, International Education and Foreign
Languages: Keys to Securing America's Future, indicates that the
programs have made progress but lack the resources necessary to keep pace
with their expanded mission. The report recommends that the U.S. Department
of Education consolidate oversight of its foreign language and international
education programs and activities, provide strategic direction, and
coordinate with the other related federal activities. It also recommends
that the Department of Education partner with universities to create
systems of continuous improvement, including developing performance
indicators and engaging networks of professionals in the field. More
information on its conclusions and recommendations can be found in the report which is
available on the NAP website. Several Congressional committees are
considering specific aspects of the committee's recommendations in the
context of reauthorization of the Higher Education Act and other
legislative initiatives.
How
are committee members for National Research Council (NRC) studies selected
and approved? Can sponsors make or influence the selection of committee
members?
Prospective committee members are identified in a variety of ways, most of
which involve suggestions from individuals considered knowledgeable in the
substantive areas relevant to a particular study. Most suggestions for
committee members come from individuals, not from institutions, organizations,
or agencies of government. Committee members are nominated by appropriate
NRC units, and are approved by the chair of the National Research Council.
The Research Council does not permit governmental agencies that sponsor
projects to select committee members because of the institution's
commitment to ensuring independence and objectivity in carrying out its
work. However, sponsors can and often do suggest nominees, some of whom may
be selected. Such a selection could be made when the individuals nominated
by a sponsor have the expertise, knowledge, and stature required and can be
expected to participate in a committee's work without being subjected to
undue influence or pressure from the sponsoring agency.
If you have a question about the work of the Center or the National
Academies that you would like addressed here, please send it to Julie Schuck. Those questions of value to
our education audience will be considered for publication.
NOW
PUBLISHED! The
Committee to Review the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays International Education
Programs released its report in a webcasted
public briefing March 27, 2007. Now the published version is ready to
order. International
Education and Foreign Languages: Keys to Securing America’s Future
is the committee's response to a congressionally mandated request to review
the Title VI international education and foreign language studies of the
Higher Education Act as well as section 102(b)(6)
Fulbright-Hays programs.
We are distributing free copies of the booklet Lessons Learned
About Testing: Ten Years of Work at the National Research Council.
This piece, from the Center’s Board on Testing and Assessment (BOTA),
illuminates key issues in testing and assessment by synthesizing
recommendations and conclusions from a number of BOTA reports. Click
here to download the PDF version. For hard copies, please contact Doug Sprunger.
...the
National Research Council's investigation of Title VI has actually echoed
critics' calls for serious reform. NRC is now demanding an array of
performance measures, insisting that universities do a better job of
cooperating with those who seek accountability, and proposing the
collection and release of a wide array of data to the public. The NRC
report also cuts sharply against the academy's insistence that its
subsidies be strictly segregated from any contact with the Department of
Defense or intelligence agencies. Instead, the report demands greatly
increased coordination between the Department of Education, the State
Department, the Department of Defense, and the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence.... Congress needs to digest this report, and then do
something about it. Everyone from the Department of Education to the higher
education lobby has been delaying reform on the claim that the NRC report
would solve everything. Well, the NRC report is out and the critics of
Title VI have been vindicated.
Within
hours of the review's release, it seemed that everyone was declaring
victory. Some of the biggest critics of the programs said that their
concerns had been vindicated and that the increased accountability proposed
by the panel would advance their agenda. But many of the groups that have
defended the programs said that their views had been vindicated, and that
the importance of their work had been backed up by the outside panel.
The
U.S. Department of Education needs a high-ranking official to oversee its
efforts to dramatically expand Americans' proficiency in foreign languages
and knowledge of international affairs, according to a report released on
Tuesday by the National Academies' National Research Council. [The report]
generally defended the programs, and their long-term and broad-based
approaches to training people highly skilled in foreign languages and with
expertise on other cultures. But it also called for more support for their
projects, which include university-based National Resource Centers and
Language Resource Centers, saying those programs should not have to compete
with or conform to more narrowly focused critical-language initiatives
shaped by current foreign-policy goals.
To
complement its existing research programs that address science education,
the Institute is establishing a National Research and DevelopmentCenter
on Cognition and Science Instruction. According to the National Research
Council, "much of the current science education curriculum is based on
dated assumptions about the nature of cognitive development and learning,
assumptions that lead to the suboptimal teaching of science"
(Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade, 2006, p.
336). The Institute intends for the Center on Cognition and Science
Instruction to improve student learning in science by proposing specific
theoretically driven modifications to existing middle school science
curricula (one or more curriculum) and by conducting a systematic series of
studies to test and refine such strategies for improving the design of
curricula. The objective of such work would be to improve current curricula
and identify general principles for the design of curriculum that could be
easily applied to other science curricula. (p. 10)
Cora
Marrett, the National Science Foundation's (NSF)
new Assistant Director for its Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR),
discussed her ideas about where education research fits into what she
called a "scientifically propitious time" for Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education. Speaking to the
American Research Education Association meeting in Chicago on April 11, Marrett
noted that... NSF's role is to act as "partnership enablers,"
...working with the research community to support efforts to enrich
evidence-based education. The key principles of the National Academies'
report Scientific Research in Education should remain the
basis for that enrichment. The principles are: 1) pose significant
questions that can be investigated empirically; 2) link relevant research
to theory; 3) use methods that permit direct investigation of the question;
4) provide a coherent and explicit chain of reasoning; 5) replicate and
generalize across studies; and 6) disclose research to encourage
professional scrutiny and critique.
The
Secretary, in consultation with representatives of Head Start agencies and
with experts in the fields of early childhood education and development,
shall use the study on Developmental
Outcomes and Assessments for Young Children by the National Academy of
Sciences to provide guidance to Head Start agencies for utilizing
scientifically-based measures that support, as appropriate-- (A) classroom
instructional practices; (B) identification of special needs; and (C)
program evaluation.
Please forward questions and comments regarding this newsletter to Julie Schuck.
This e-newsletter is brought to
you by the National Academies’ Center for Education 500 Fifth Street, NW,
Washington, DC20001 Tel:
202-334-2353
Unsubscribe
You have received this newsletter because you are currently or have been
recently involved in the development of our work or have expressed interest
in receiving updates on the activities and products from the Center for
Education. If you do not want to receive this quarterly newsletter from
CFE, please
click here. Or paste this link in your browser,
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/mail_list/default.asp?list_id=736&action=unsubscribe
If this newsletter has been forwarded to you and you wish to subscribe, please
click here.
Or paste this link in your browser,
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/mail_list/default.asp?list_id=736&action=subscribe
