home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Suzy B Software 2
/
Suzy B Software CD-ROM 2 (1994).iso
/
kids
/
child_ed
/
intro.txt
< prev
Wrap
Text File
|
1995-04-27
|
17KB
|
279 lines
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Assistant Secretary for Research and Improvement,
Counselor to the Secretary
As Secretary Bennett notes in his foreword, preparing
this volume was the first assignment that I received when I
joined him at the Department of Education in June l985, just as
restructuring and streamlining the part of the Department that
produces research and statistics was the first major "organiza-
tional" effort that Dr. Bennett launched after assuming his
present office.
What is the message in these two actions? They show that we
believe strongly in the responsibility of the Department of
Education to gather information and generate knowledge about
education in an efficient and energetic manner and then make that
information and knowledge accessible to people who might benefit
from them.
But it turns out to be easier to gather data and support research
than to make results available in forms that people will find
clear and useful.
Statistical data tend to come in vast, indigestible quantities,
often without the markers of changes and trends, improvements and
declines, that distinguish information that is merely interesting
from that which can form the basis for decisions and actions. As
for research findings, scholars ordinarily write for other schol-
ars and they seldom know as much as they think they should know
before drawing definite conclusions. In many research areas,
furthermore, there are conflicts between rival interpretations of
the same evidence, and at every turn conclusions are hedged by
the well-known academic caution: statistical correlation does
not reliably indicate causation. Finally, scholars and laymen
are often at odds about the significance of things. What strikes
the scholar as interesting and important may seem to the layman
remote and trivial; what the layman wants most to know may strike
the researcher as banal, simplistic, or vague.
Despite yeoman efforts, we may yet stumble into some of those
traps between the covers of this slim volume. We may present
research findings that some readers will find obscure, puzzling,
or impracticable and still others that seem to be oversimplifica-
tions of complex phenomena or premature resolutions of hotly
contested disputes.
This risk we must take, but we have tried to minimize it.
The book does not make a particular point, beyond the straight-
forward one that education is susceptible both to being under-
stood and to being improved. We have provided evidence from many
but not all spheres of education research. We sought findings
that, in Secretary Bennett's frequent phrase, are "true, useful
and important." We included only those findings about which
research evidence and expert opinion were consistent, persuasive,
and fairly stable over time. Each finding in this volume has
been checked and rechecked by professional staff members in the
Office of Educational Research and Improvement and by expert
outside reviewers. During this process, we discarded more items
than we kept, among them dozens of research findings that we
judged to be less reliable, less helpful, or less consequential
than those we retained.
It must also be noted that people do not necessarily agree about
what knowledge is most useful or important. They may even dis-
agree about what is "known," sometimes because the evidence is
mixed, sometimes because one may not welcome the implication of
another's "knowledge." Statistical significance aside, since
what is certain to one may be inconclusive to another, we have
tried to follow the wisdom of Socrates who explained (to Meno, in
Plato's dialogue of that name) that "true opinion is as good a
guide to correct action as knowledge." Solid knowledge is surely
to be preferred, but to wait for absolute certainty is sometimes
to wait too long, particularly in the field of education where
millions of children are affected every day by our actions. If we
would have those actions be as well-informed as possible, in
situations where we do not have knowledge we can reasonably allow
our actions to be informed by "true opinion," by what informed
people judge to be the "most likely story."
In this volume, as you will see, we draw upon the knowledge and
opinions both of modern scholars and of distinguished thinkers of
earlier times. Let me now take up several questions to which
readers may want answers.
Is this report comprehensive?
No. In many branches of education that people regard as impor-
tant, not much formal research has yet been done, or that which
has been done is fragmentary, inconclusive, or hotly disputed. A
substantial portion of educational research is of relatively
recent vintage, and much that has been done in the past several
decades has centered around this straight-forward question:
What can we do to make it more likely that all children will
emerge into adulthood with the basic skills and knowledge that
some children routinely seem to acquire as they pass from home
through elementary and secondary school?
Because variations on that question have--I think properly--
driven so much of our research to date, we should not be sur-
prised that we have learned relatively more about it. But that
means less attention has thus far been devoted to other issues in
education that also deserve study.
Why do so many of these findings look so obvious? Was "research"
really needed to reveal what intuition and common sense would
show?
In the absence of reliable and valid evidence or experience, our
unprejudiced views are usually shaped by intuition and common
sense. Until they are put to the test, however, one person's
intuition and common sense are as reliable--or unreliable--as
another's, and they are often in conflict. In company with some
geographers and scientists of his day, Columbus surmised that the
world was round. But many less astute observers embraced the
conventional wisdom of his time and insisted that it was flat;
this "wisdom" did not change until Columbus tested the true
opinion of himself and the scientists with the voyage that dis-
covered America and proved their version of the truth to be
correct.
In education, too, research sometimes appears to confirm the
self-evident. But sometimes it raises important doubts about
conventional wisdom.
Why is so much of the research about elementary schools and
disadvantaged children?
This situation stems from the ambitious educational reforms of
the 1960s. Ironically, it is also one more example of the fail-
ings of conventional wisdom.
Two decades ago, conventional wisdom about education held that
disadvantaged and minority children did poorly in school mainly
because of the inequitable distribution of educational resources.
To document this belief, Congress commissioned a huge national
survey of the schools. The resulting project came to be known as
the Coleman Report. This was probably the best known and most
influential piece of educational research ever published. Its
conclusion that unequal achievement could not be ascribed to
unequal school resources so offended the conventional wisdom of
the time that the next 20 years of educational research have been
dominated by the quest for contrary evidence.
But, of course, the problem of educational disadvantage--a prob-
lem still with us today--was deeper and more complex than any
simple disparity in the size of school libraries or the condition
of school buildings. Its roots reached into the home and the
classroom. Coleman's discovery, for example, that there was more
difference in the achievement of black children within the same
school than from one school to another also led researchers to
examine more closely the interaction between teacher and student
rather than just the effects of school facilities, spending
levels, or class size.
This line of inquiry is visible throughout the past two decades
of educational research, much of which describes practices found
to be particularly effective in fostering the academic education
of disadvantaged school children. Heated arguments about the
appropriate expectations and methods of instruction for disadvan-
taged children were commonplace during the 1960s and 1970s.
Research had to document common sense: children are more likely
to learn the basics in schools that emphasize the basics and less
likely to learn them in schools that do not.
It has been a worthy effort. The critical features of instruc-
tion and organization for more effective schools were documented
by research. (A number of them are summarized and repeated in
this volume.) It is no coincidence that the achievement scores
of disadvantaged elementary school students have steadily im-
proved in the past decades. That part of the academic puzzle has
been at least partly demystified.
Would all children benefit equally from the application of the
facts and findings contained in this report?
Within the range and limits of the evidence, we have tried to
deal with the "general" or "usual" or "average" situation, not
with all the special circumstances that are found among millions
of children, tens of thousands of schools, and thousands of
school systems in as many communities. Hence no one will find
here a map out of every tangled situation or a solution to each
distinctive problem. In an enterprise as large and variegated as
American education, many children, teachers, parents, and schools
differ from the "general" in various respects. But few differ in
all respects and we therefore hope that practically everyone will
find something of interest and relevance in the pages that
follow.
Why does the report contain so few specific recommendations about
actions that should be taken?
This is not an education "cookbook" so much as a "guide to sound
nutrition." Specific policies, practices, and actions are the
responsibility of the parent and the school, the teacher and
principal, the school board and the State. The appropriate
design and implementation of these policies, practices, and ac-
tions will differ according to local conditions and it is not the
place of the federal government to interfere. Nor do we seek to
exhort people to do anything that contradicts their own "true
opinions", although we would urge you to subject them to the test
of experience at every opportunity.
The purpose of this volume is to provide reliable information
that people can, if they wish, put to use in various ways. In
most instances, the reader will rapidly be able to visualize some
implications for action of findings that we have included.
Why are so many of these findings aimed at parents and teachers
rather than at those who direct and make policy for the "educa-
tion system?"
Let us emphasize that many of them are indeed meant for parents
as well as for professional teachers. Parents are the child's
first and most influential teachers. If parents are not effective
teachers, then in most cases the school will have far greater
difficulty being effective.
As for administrators and policymakers, we believe that they,
too, will find in this volume many implications--if not specific
recommendations --for their own activities. Besides setting
overall standards and furnishing resources,
perhaps their most important function is to create the conditions
in which parents and teachers, working together, can maximize
educational effectiveness.
What of the students themselves? Don't they share in
this responsibility?
Indeed, yes. The passive learner usually doesn't learn
much and the hostile student rarely learns anything worthwhile.
Many of the findings in this volume convey--or assume--an old-
fashioned "desire for improvement" on the part of the child;
others indicate the sorts of actions that parents or teachers can
take to maximize the child's enthusiasm for learning and to avoid
chilling his ardor.
While it is true that some children have difficulty mastering
complicated subjects, few are without resources to do so. More
commonly, the resources they have are underused. Parents can
play vital and constructive roles in the education of their own
children, and research has illuminated sound methods of home
assistance. Students can add greatly to the time provided in
school with time set aside at home for study and other forms of
homework. We see too little "self-help" in many households
today, especially among those students whose academic achievement
is lagging and who need it the most.
What if I want to learn more than this volume contains? To assist
the reader interested in more evidence or in exploring the actual
research, each finding is accompanied by citations of several
sources for further reading. Most of these sources can be ob-
tained through a good library.
In turn, many of those citations lead to articles, books or
studies that contain lengthy bibliographies of their own. We did
not try to provide complete research documentation, but in every
instance we have pointed the direction to further--and deeper--
understanding. In addition, we would invite your attention to
the Education Research Information Clearinghouse (ERIC) system,
supported by the Education Department, which provides extensive
information about research findings and which can be accessed
through most libraries.
* * *
This volume appears at a special time. American education is
undergoing enormous reform, a nationwide effort to improve the
outcomes of schooling and reverse the decline in student achieve-
ment that developed over the past quarter century. Many of the
actors are new; for example, the governors of many States have
taken a deep interest in the quality of schools and colleges in
their jurisdictions, and many State legislatures have stolen the
march on the education profession in prescribing the reforms that
they expect will boost educational outcomes. The contents of
this volume ought to be of help to them, as well as to parents,
teachers and citizens.
We do not, however, claim to be offering pat answers or simple
nostrums. It is not reasonable to expect research to resolve all
issues or to erase all differences of opinion. We can but supply
some information that we think reliable and we will continue in
the future to supply more. But it is up to the American people
to decide what to do. The better their information, the wiser
will be their decisions.
* * *
Finally, on behalf of Secretary Bennett as well as my-
self, I want to thank the many individuals whose efforts made
this report possible.
Milton Goldberg and Jim Bencivenga were responsible for project
oversight and management. Development and production of the
material in this volume was accomplished through the extraordina-
ru efforts of Tommy M. Tomlinson and Susan Traiman. Editing
through many drafts was coordinated by Kay McKinney with major
assistance from Laurie Maxwell.
Several dozen staff members of the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement also contributed to this project.
We especially appreciate the contributions of the outside
reviewers who did their best to help assure the accuracy,
veracity, validity, and importance of the contents of this
report: Joseph Adelson, Lois Coit, Bernard R. Gifford,
Robert Glaser, Robert Hogan, Michael Kirst, Rita Kramer,
Leanna Landsmann, Jean Marzollo, and Diane Ravitch.
Particular thanks are due to Professor Herbert Walberg
for his manifold efforts on our behalf. While the
Department of Education is properly responsible for any
error of style, substance, or selection, the willing
assistance of these reviewers has added immeasurably to
the quality of the result.