Lynch School reports of the worlds eighth-graders

The Lynch School of Education has released the results of the 1999 Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) Benchmark, which compares eighth graders in U.S. public schools to similar students from 37 other countries. The data paint a picture of widely varying academic performance within the United States. Some of the nation's schools appear to be among the world's best, while others rank near the bottom of international standings.

The report was produced by the International Study Center (ISC) of the Lynch School, under the direction of Ina Mullis and Michael Martin. The project included a standardized test administered to students, as well as analysis of a wide range of environmental factors that affect learning. The 1999 Benchmark was a partial repeat of an earlier study, TIMSS 1995; a third TIMSS project is planned for 2003.

The U.S. Benchmark report includes data from 13 states and 14 school districts or consortia of districts that volunteered to participate. It provides a more nuanced analysis of the American education system than did an earlier TIMSS report, released last fall, which compared random samples of students in the 38 participating countries. (In that broader study, the United States ranked in the middle, alongside England but far below several Asian nations.)

In general, the Benchmark data support the familiar relationship between a student's socioeconomic standing and academic performance. Eighth graders from two relatively wealthy regions of Illinois, for instance--Naperville School District #203 and the First in the World Consortium--tested comparably to students from schools in top-scoring Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, and South Korea. At the other end of the scale, public school students in Rochester (New York), Chicago, Jersey City, and Miami-Dade County--all of which include relatively impoverished neighborhoods--placed near the bottom of the international rankings, alongside Tunisia, Iran, and Indonesia. Community resources were a factor: Schools in university towns or economic centers often reported involvement in mentorships and other support programs offered by the business and education communities. Alisabeth Hohn, the assessment director of the high-scoring Academy School District #20 in Colorado, for instance, cited the burgeoning high-tech industry of Denver and the proximity of the Air Force Academy when asked to explain her students' success.

The 1999 Benchmark study went beyond socioeconomic measures, however, to consider the roles of teacher training and pedagogy in student performance. TIMSS asked teachers in participating schools to evaluate their preparedness to teach math and science. U.S. teachers were among the quickest to praise their training: 87 percent declared themselves "very well prepared" to teach math, compared to the international average of just 63 percent. At the same time, U.S. teachers were far less likely to have specific mathematics training than were their counterparts abroad--41 percent of U.S. eighth grade teachers reported receiving specific training in mathematics or math education, versus the international average of 71 percent.

Proper teaching methods are another key to student learning and performance, according to TIMSS research. Data taken from extensive videotaping of classrooms around the world suggest that an emphasis on math and science reasoning--instead of memorization--leads to higher test scores. The U.S. schools that fared best on the TIMSS tests resemble schools in Japan and other top-performing Asian nations in their focus on the logical frameworks, not just the mechanics, of math and science. "That whole way of teaching students begins very early in our district," said Naperville curriculum director Jodi Wirt. TIMSS data show that in poor-performing classrooms, students spend the majority of their time learning by rote and doing repetitive problem sets.

Most official responses to the TIMSS Benchmark report have centered on the issue of teacher training. In a prepared statement, Lee Stiff, president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, maintained, "It's time for us to say as a nation that [teachers] need to have a specialty in the content area" of their courses--a view also expressed by Sandra Feldman, president of the American Federation of Teachers.

A review of newspaper headlines that followed the release of the TIMMS Benchmark data, however, reveals a focus on the report's rankings. "U.S. Pupils Take Middle in Math, Science Test" announced the Boston Globe. The Associated Press reported, "U.S. 8th Graders Test About Average." "American Students Outranked Again" said the Hartford Courant. Contrast these concerns with those of the Yomiuri Shimbun, a daily newspaper in Japan. Although Japan ranked among the top five nations in TIMSS 1999, the Shimbun headline read, "Japanese Students Lack Interest in Math, Science."

In a Boston Herald editorial a few days after the TIMSS Benchmark report was released, Lynch School dean Mary Brabeck wrote that too often rankings are used to "assign shame and blame." Altering education policy with the sole aim of improving scores could "put our students, teachers and school districts through an expensive, time-consuming process with little payoff." The real value of the Benchmark, Brabeck suggested, will come from a careful application of its many policy implications: "There is no magic bullet that can be used to improve student achievement. . . . The TIMSS study helps us all with information, not blame or shame, to cross the bridge to school improvement."

Tim Heffernan

Top of page