Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Indicators of
Precollege Education in
Science and Mathematics
APreliminay Renew
Senta A. Raizen and
Lyle V. Jones, editors
Committee on indicators of Precollege
Science and Mathematics Education
Commission on Behavioral and
Social Sciences and Education
National Research Council
National Academy Press
Washington, D.C. 1985
OCR for page R2
National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing
Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the
Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were
chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to
procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the
National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute
of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences
in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's
purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council
operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy under the
authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a private
nonprofit, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the princi-
pal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering in the conduct of their services to the government, the public,
and the scientific and engineering communities. It is administered jointly by both
Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering and the
Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter
of the National Academy of Sciences.
This study by a committee of the National Research Council (NRC) was supported by
the NRC Fund, which consists of contributions from: a consortium of private founda-
tions including the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Charles E. Culpeper Founda-
tion, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and John D. and Catherine T. MacAr-
thur Foundation, the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; the Academy Industry Program, which seeks annual
contributions from companies that are concerned with the health of U.S. science and
technology and with public policy issues with technological content; and the endow-
ments of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Main entry under title:
Indicators of precollege education in science and mathematics.
Bibliography: p.
1. Science Study and teaching (Secondary) United States Evaluation. 2.
Mathematics Study and teaching (Secondary) United States Evaluation. 3.
Science indicators United States. I. Raizen, Senta A. II. Jones, Lyle V. III. National
Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Indicators of Precollege Science and Mathemat-
ics Education.
Q183.3.A.lI53 1985 507'.1073 85-3028
International Standard Book Number 0-309-03536-8
Printed in the United States of America
First Printing, April 1985
Second Printing, May 1988
OCR for page R3
Committee on
Indicators of Precollege Science
and Mathematics Education
..
LYLE V. JONES (Chair), L. L. Thurstone Psychometric Laboratory,
University of North Carolina (psychology, statistics)
RICHARD D. ANDERSON, Council of Scientific Societies
Presidents, Washington, D.C. (mathematics)
NORMAN M. BRADBURN, Provost, University of Chicago (survey
research)
DENIS F. JOHNSTON, Washington, D. C. (statistics, social
indicators)
C. THOMAS KERINS, Illinois Office of Education, Springfield
(program evaluation and testing)
HAROLD NISSELSON, Westat, Inc., Rockville, Maryland
(statistics)
DONALD B. RUBIN, Departments of Statistics and Education,
University of Chicago (statistics)
MARSHALL S. SMITH, Wisconsin Center for Education Research,
University of Wisconsin (educational research and policy)
MARY L. TENOPYR, AT&T, New York, N.Y. (industrial
psychology)
WAYNE W. WELCH, Department of Education, University of
Minnesota (educational psychology, science education)
SENTA A. RAIZEN, Study Director
· · —
111
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
Preface
Some 25 years ago, in the wake of the launching of Sputnik by the
Soviet Union, the United States embarked on a reform of science
and mathematics education. The primary objective then was to
ensure that- a sizable number of students would be motivated to
choose scientific and technical careers and would be well educated
to do so. Today, again, the United States is embarking on a reform
of science and mathematics education. But the present call for
reform embraces a larger mission: not only to meet the country's
need for scientific and technical manpower, but also to ensure
scientific and technical literacy for all students. Students must be
prepared for the changing requirements of a society more and more
heavily linked to rapidly advancing technology, no matter at what
stage they terminate formal education.
To help assess the degree to which this ambitious new goal is
approached, the National Research Council established a Commit-
tee on Indicators of Precollege Science and Mathematics Education.
Many efforts are already under way to improve the teaching and
learning of mathematics and science by all students in elementary
and secondary school. To understand the impact of these efforts
and make them more effective in the future, it is important to be
able to monitor the condition of science and mathematics education
in the nation's schools. And for that monitoring, assessment
measures indicators must be available. The committee was
charged with developing a framework for an efficient set of in-
dicators, filling in the framework as far as possible with existing
data to provide a baseline, and suggesting what data and analyses
will be needed in the future for a continuing portrayal of the condi-
tion of precollege science and mathematics education.
This report presents the committee's work, based on a review of
information and data currently available. As the title of the report
v
OCR for page R6
indicates, it is a preliminary study, but we hope one that lays a solid
foundation for the next tasks, to be performed by a successor
committee that will include mathematicians and scientists as well as
experts in educational research and data. Under the chairmanship
of John G. Truxal, Department of Technology and Sociology, State
University of New York at Stony Brook, the successor committee
will address the important goal of developing imaginative new
indicators. It will also continue to consult with state departments of
education and will initiate communication with local school dis-
tricts to help build a coordinated monitoring system for mathemat-
ics and science education. The new committee will be helped in its
work by other National Research Council activities, for example,
the Committee on Research in Mathematics, Science, and Technol-
ogy Education, which is examining what research needs to be done
to address critical substantive issues pertaining to the improvement
of mathematics and science education.
We wish to acknowledge the assistance provided to our commit-
tee by a number of state officials; their names are listed in the
Appendix. As the work of the successor committee proceeds, the
help of state and local education authorities will continue to be
needed to bring about a monitoring system for science and mathe-
matics education that is useful at all levels of educational govern-
ance.
The committee extends to Senta A. Raizen, study director, its
greatest expression of gratitude: without her initiative, persever-
ance, and enthusiastic dedication to our task, this report could not
have been written.
LYLE V. JONES, Chair
Committee on Indicators of
Precollege Science and Mathematics
Education
V1
OCR for page R7
Contents
1. Introduction and Summary
INTRODUCTION, 1
Background, 1
Scope of Report, 4
SUMMARY, 6
Selecting Indicators, 6
Outcome Variables, 7; Process Variables, 9; Input Variables, 9
Teachers, 12
Findings: Supply and Demand, 12; Findings:
Quality, 14; Conclusions and Recommendations, 15
Curriculum Content, 16
Findings, 16; Conclusions and Recommendations, 17
Instructional Time and Course Enrollment, 18
Findings, 18; Conclusions and Recommendations: Elementary
School, 19; Conclusions and Recommendations: Secondary
School, 20
Student Outcomes, 22
Findings, 22; Conclusions and Recommendations, 23
2. The Selection and Interpretation of Indicators ...
AVAILABLE DATA AND INFORMATION ON EDUCATION, 25
THE CONCEPT OF INDICATORS, 27
SELECTING INDICATOR VARIABLES, 29
Outcomes, 29
Schooling Inputs and Processes, 32
School Processes: Instructional Time, 33;
Input Variables, 34
Conclusion, 38
COLLECTING INFORMATION, 39
DISAGGREGATING DATA, 40
Collecting Data at the State and Local Levels, 40
Disaggregating Data by Demographic Descriptors, 41
Separating Data by Educational Level, 41
INTERPRETING INDICATORS, 42
· ~
V11
1
25
OCR for page R8
3-
Schooling Input to Science and Mathematics
Education: Teachers and Curriculum Content
TEACHERS, 44
Number of Teachers, 47
Supply of Teachers, 47; Demand for Teachers, 52
Quality of Teachers, 61
· · ~
... 44
Elementary School, 64; Secondary School, 65; Defining Teacher
Quality, 66
Findings, 68
Supply and Demand, 68; Quality, 70
Conclusions and Recommendations, 70
Supply and Demand, 70; Quality, 71
CURRICULUM CONTENT, 72
Opportunity to Learn, 72
The Role of Textbooks, 74
Variations in Topic Emphasis, 77
Findings, 80
Opportunity to Learn, 80; Textbooks and Courses, 80
Conclusions and Recommendations, 81
Curriculum Content, 81; Textbooks and Courses, 81; Tests, 82
4. The Schooling Process: Instructional Time and
Course Enrollment .............................
INSTRUCTIONAL TIME AND STUDENT LEARNING, 84
Allocated Versus Actual Instructional Time, 88
Homework, 89
MEASURING INSTRUCTIONAL TIME, 9
Elementary School, 91
High School, 96
FINDINGS, 106
Instructional Time and Student Learning, 106
Measuring Instructional Time, 106
Elementary School, 106; High School, 106
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 107
Elementary School, 107
Measures of Instructional Time, 107; Improving
Methods for Collecting Information, 107
Secondary School, 108
Measures of Course Enrollment, 108; Improving
Measures of Course Enrollment, 108; Assessing the
Effects of Policy Changes, 109
· · —
vail
.. 83
OCR for page R9
Student Outcomes
STUDENT ATTITUDES, 1lO
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, 113
Measures of Achievement, 113
Grades, 113; Test Scores, 114
Limitations of Achievement Tests, 115
Achievement: All Students, 117
Mathematics, 117; Science, 124
Achievement: College-Bound Students, 128
FINDINGS, 132
Tests, 132
Achievement, 132
All Students, 132; College-Bound Students, 133
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 133
Assessments of Achievement, 133
Tests, 133
References
Appendix: State Data
INTRODUCTION, 149
TEACHERS, 152
California, 156; Connecticut, 156; Illinois, 157; Michigan, 160;
Minnesota, 160; New Jersey, 161; New York, 163; North
Carolina, 165; Pennsylvania, 165
CONTENT, 166
Connecticut, 166; Illinois, 167; Michigan, 167; Minnesota, 168;
New York, 168; North Carolina, 169; Pennsylvania, 169
INSTRUCTIONAL TIME/ENROLEMENT, 169
California, 169; Illinois, 171; Michigan, 172; Minnesota, 173;
New Jersey, 174; New York, 175; North Carolina, 178;
Pennsylvania, 178; Washington, 178
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, 180
California, 182; Connecticut, 183; Illinois, 185; Michigan, 187;
Minnesota, 189; New Jersey, 190; New York, 192; North
Carolina, 193; Pennsylvania, 193; Washington, 194
REFERENCES, 195
STATE PERSONNEL, 199
110
135
149
1X
OCR for page R10
