This document evolved from early activities of the board. As the board reviewed the plans for the Computers in Education Study being conducted under the aegis of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, (IEA), it became clear that guidelines should be developed for reviewing proposals and responding to agency requests for advice on whether to participate in specific studies. Thus, we began to develop principles for appraising proposals for international comparative education studies.
During its second year, our sponsoring agencies requested the board's advice on plans of the Educational Testing Service for a second International Assessment of Educational Progress, the second cycle of what might become a new series of international studies. Since the proposed series would compete for funding and for access to schools with studies planned by the IEA, which had been involved in international assessments for 30 years, the board recognized the need for a conceptual framework for a long-range plan for international studies. Therefore, we began development of a framework for advising government agencies on participation in international comparative studies. In addition to considering the question of U.S. participation in international comparisons, the framework considers why the United States should participate in international studies and what kinds of studies it should support; discusses general issues in comparative education studies; and proposes a framework for establishing priorities for different types of studies. The framework may also be helpful in identifying areas of research that are neglected.
The board recognizes that it cannot unilaterally establish a framework for international studies, but it hopes to stimulate international discussion of such a framework. We offer this document as a basis for international discussion of the issues that must be considered in establishing priorities for different types of studies. The board plans to disseminate the document widely in the education research and policy communities, and welcomes comments on it. As a next step in building consensus, the board plans to convene a conference on the framework and principles in the spring of 1991 for discussion of the need for specific studies, including a desirable schedule for them. Following the conference we expect to prepare a prescriptive framework report that recommends a long-range plan for U.S. participation in specific international studies.
I want to extend my appreciation to the members of the two working groups who prepared the draft documents that were the basis of this report. The group of James Guthrie (chair), Edward Haertel, and Judith Torney-Purta developed the draft "Principles for Appraising International Comparative Education Proposals" and repeatedly revised it to reflect discussion at board meetings. The group of Stephen Heyneman (chair), Edward Haertel, Lyle Jones, Gaea Leinhardt, and Judith Torney-Purta drafted the "Framework for International Comparative Studies of Education." I also wish to thank all board members for the stimulating discussions that ultimately shaped this report.
The board sent the draft framework and principles documents for review to almost 100 comparative education researchers, including members of the general assembly of the IEA, several national research coordinators for the International Assessment of Educational Progress, numerous members of the European Consortium of Institutes for Educational Research and Development, and several education researchers in the United States and in international organizations concerned with education. We received comment from 39 researchers in 19 different countries and 7 from researchers in international organizations. They are too numerous to mention by name, but we would like to thank all of those who gave so generously of their time in reviewing the drafts. They provided thoughtful and incisive comments, some of them based on the experience and knowledge acquired in life-time careers in comparative education. Their comments were of invaluable assistance to the board.
The board is grateful to Eugenia Grohman, Associate Director for Reports for the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, for her fine technical editorial work, which contributed greatly to the organization and readability of this document. We would also like to thank members of the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education who reviewed the manuscript and offered cogent comments.
Finally, I want to extend my appreciation to Dorothy Gilford, director of the board, who is coeditor of the report and who provided the staff support that was indispensable to completion of the document and that made life tolerable for the chairman. As research assistant, Laura Lathrop was most helpful in classifying the hundreds of comments received from our colleagues who reviewed the preliminary drafts, and she handled all logistical arrangements for board meetings efficiently and effectively. Jane Phillips serves ably as administrative secretary for the board and cheerfully and competently coped with multiple rounds of revisions of this document.
Norman M. Bradburn, Chair
Board on International Comparative Studies in Education
NAS Home Page | NAP Home Page | Reading Room | Report Home Page