AERA-L: Politics and Policy in Education Forum

If you reply to this long (20 kB) post please don't hit the reply 
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your 
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already 
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.

****************************************
ABSTRACT:  Greene and Shock (GS), in an article "Adding Up to 
Failure: Ed schools put diversity before math," report that Ed School 
course titles containing words like "multiculturalism" exceeded those 
containing words like "math" so as to yield a 
"multiculturalism-to-math ratio" of 1.82.   They then imply that U.S. 
students' relatively poor performance on the PISA math literacy test 
is linked to the fact that Ed Schools are more concerned with 
multiculturism than math.  However, EDDRA subscribers pointed out a 
glaring fault in the GS analysis: most pre-service teachers take 
their math courses from math departments outside the Ed Schools, so 
GS's "multiculturalism-to-math ratio" is deceptive. GS might also 
have calculated a "multiculturalism-to-science ratio" greater than 1 
and linked it to U.S. students' relatively poor performance on the 
PISA science literacy test.  But here again such a ratio would be 
deceptive because most pre-service teachers take their science 
content courses from science departments outside the Ed Schools.  The 
question then becomes: ARE U.S. UNIVERSITY MATH & SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS 
*PARTIALLY* RESPONSIBLE FOR U.S. STUDENTS' RELATIVELY POOR SHOWING ON 
THE PISA-2006 MATH & SCIENCE TESTS?  Judging from  the appalling low 
pre-to-post test normalized gains for traditional passive-student 
courses in astronomy, geoscience, math, and physics, the answer may 
be YES.
****************************************

John Lawhead (2008), in his EDDRA post of 12 Jan 2008 titled "Adding 
up to Nonsense," called attention to the "City Journal" article 
"Adding Up to Failure: Ed schools put diversity before math" by Jay 
Greene and Catherine Shock (2008).

Greene & Shock (2008) wrote [bracketed by lines "G&S-G&S-G&S. . . ."]

G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S
To determine just how unbalanced teacher preparation is at ed 
schools, we counted the number of course titles and descriptions that 
contained the words "multiculturalism," "diversity," "inclusion," and 
variants thereof, and then compared those with the number that used 
variants of the word "math." We then computed a 
"multiculturalism-to-math ratio" - a rough indicator of the relative 
importance of social goals to academic skills in ed schools. A ratio 
of greater than 1 indicates a greater emphasis on multiculturalism; a 
ratio of less than 1 means that math courses predominate.  Our survey 
covered the nation's top 50 education programs as ranked by "U.S. 
News and World Report," as well as programs at flagship state 
universities that weren't among the top 50 - a total of 71 education 
schools. The average ed school, we found, has a 
multiculturalism-to-math ratio of 1.82, meaning that it offers 82 
percent more courses featuring social goals than featuring math. . . 
. . . . . Ensuring quality math instruction is no minor matter. The 
Programme for International Student Assessment's latest results paint 
a bleak picture: U.S. 15-year-olds ranked 24th out of 30 industrial 
countries in math literacy, tying Spain and surpassing only Greece, 
Italy, Portugal, Mexico, and Turkey, while trailing Iceland, Hungary, 
Poland, the Slovak Republic, and all of our major economic 
competitors in Europe and Asia. . . . .[these sound more like the 
PISA-2003 results [NCES (2005)], not the latest PISA (2006) results]. 
. . . .
G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S-G&S

Lawhead pointed out a glaring fault in the analysis of Greene & Shock 
(2008):  "[They] don't consider that education students 
cross-register in other departments, and thus may take math in 
departments outside education schools." This same point was 
reiterated by EDDRA posters Brian  Davis (2008) and DoctorMark 
(2008).  The latter wrote: "What these 'researchers' don't tell you 
is that most pre-service teachers take their math content courses 
from math departments, not in the education school."

Greene & Shock might also have calculated a 
"multiculturalism-to-science ratio" greater than 1 and linked it to 
U.S. students' relatively poor performance on the PISA (2006) science 
literacy test.  But here again such a ratio would be deceptive 
because most pre-service teachers take their science content courses 
from science departments outside the Ed Schools. 

The question then becomes: ARE U.S. UNIVERSITY MATH & SCIENCE 
DEPARTMENTS *PARTIALLY* RESPONSIBLE FOR U.S. STUDENTS' RELATIVELY 
POOR SHOWING ON THE PISA-2006 MATH & SCIENCE TESTS?

In the case of physics, pre/post testing has shown that "normalized 
gains" (actual gain divided by maximum possible gain) on valid and 
consistently reliable tests of conceptual understanding of Newtonian 
mechanics are appalling low for traditional passive-student lecture 
courses [Hake (1998a,b)]. Similar results showing minimal gain in 
conceptual understanding have been obtained for undergraduate 
astronomy [Brogt et al. (2007), geoscience [Libarkin & Anderson 
(2005)], and calculus [Epstein (2007)]. 

THEREFORE THE ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION MAY BE "YES."

In "Physics First: Opening Battle in the War on Science/Math 
Illiteracy?" [Hake (2002)], I listed seven steps that might be taken 
to increase the pool of effective science/math teachers, the most 
important being to motivate universities to discharge their 
obligation to adequately educate prospective K-12 teachers.

Consider also these comments taken from Section 8, " The Failure of 
Higher Education to Improve the Public Schools" in "Should We Measure 
Change? Yes!" [Hake (2007)]:

a. John Goodlad (1990):
"Few matters are more important than the quality of the teachers in 
our nation's schools. Few matters are as neglected. . . . .  A 
central thesis of this book is that there is a natural connection 
between good teachers and good schools and that this connection has 
been largely ignored. . . . It is folly to assume that schools can be 
exemplary when their stewards are ill-prepared."

b. Larry Cuban (2003):
". . . I know from both experience and research that the teacher is 
at the heart of student learning and school improvement by virtue of 
being the classroom authority and gatekeeper for change. Thus the 
preparation, induction, and career development of teachers remain the 
Archimedean lever for both short- and long-term improvement of public 
schools."

c. Sherman Stein (1997), writing of mathematics education, but his 
comments apply as well to other branches of education:
"The first stage in the reform movement should have been to improve 
the mathematical knowledge of present and prospective elementary 
teachers. Unfortunately, the cart of curriculum reform has been put 
before the horse of well-prepared teachers . . . . . If all teachers 
were mathematically well prepared, I for one would stop worrying 
about the age-old battle still raging between "back to basics" and 
"understanding." On the other hand, if mathematics departments do 
nothing to improve school mathematics, they should stop complaining 
that incoming freshmen lack mathematical skills."

d. Herbert Clemens (1989), again concerned with math education, but 
he could have been talking about almost any discipline:
"Why don't mathematicians from universities and industry belong in 
math education? The first reason is that it is self-destructive. The 
quickest way to be relegated to the intellectual dustbin in the 
mathematics departments of most research universities today is to 
demonstrate a continuing interest in secondary. . .[or even worse, 
primary]. . . mathematics education. Colleagues smile tolerantly to 
one another in the same way family members do when grandpa dribbles 
his soup down his shirt. Math education is certainly an acceptable 
form of retiring as a mathematician, like university administration 
(unacceptable forms being the stock market, EST. . .[ Erhard Seminar 
Training?]. . . , or a mid-life love affair). But you don't do good 
research and think seriously about education."


Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of  Deventer, The Netherlands.
<[log in to unmask]>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>

"Although we in higher education are very skillful at ignoring the 
obvious, it is gradually
dawning on some of us that we bear a substantial part of the 
responsibility for this sad
situation [in K-12 education]."
       Don Langenberg [BHEF (2001), p. 23], physicist and (at the time)
       Chancellor of the University of Maryland System

REFERENCES
BHEF. 2001. Business - Higher Education Forum (a partnership of the 
American Council on Education and the National Alliance of Business), 
Winter, "Sharing Responsibility: How Leaders in Business and Higher 
Education Can Improve America's Schools" online at 
<http://www.bhef.com/publications/sharing_responsibility.pdf> (716 
kB).

Brogt, E., D. Sabers, E.E. Prather, G.L. Deming, B. Hufnagel, and 
T.F. Slater. 2007. "Analysis of the Astronomy Diagnostic Test," 
Astronomy Education Review 1(6); online at 
<http://aer.noao.edu/cgi-bin/article.pl?id=239>.

Clemens, H. 1989. "Is There a Role for Mathematicians in Math 
Education?" Notices of the American Mathematical Society 36(5): 
542-544.

Cuban, L. 2003. "Why Is It So Hard To Get Good Schools?" Teachers 
College Press - information at 
<http://store.tcpress.com/0807742945.shtml>.

Davis,B. 2008. "Re: Adding up to Nonsense," EDDRA post of Jan 12, 
2008 3:46 pm; online at
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra/message/3878>.

DoctorMark. 2008. "Re: Adding up to Nonsense," EDDRA post of Jan 12, 
2008 6:24 pm; online at 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra/message/3879>.

Epstein, J. 2007. "Development and Validation of the Calculus Concept 
Inventory," in Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on 
Mathematics Education in a Global Community, 7-12 September, edited 
by Pugalee, Rogerson & Schinck; online at 
<http://math.unipa.it/~grim/21_project/21_charlotte_EpsteinPaperEdit.pdf> 
(48 kB).

Goodlad, J.I. 1994. "Teachers For Our Nation's Schools" Jossey-Bass. 
Amazon.com information at <http://tinyurl.com/3clny7>.

Greene, J.P. & C. Shock. 2008. "Adding Up to Failure: Ed schools put 
diversity before math," City Journal 18(1); online at 
<http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_snd-ed_schools.html>. City 
Journal is a publication of the Manhattan Institute for Policy 
Research <http://www.manhattan-institute.org/> edited by Brian 
Anderson <http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/anderson.htm>. See 
also Greene (2006).  According to 
<http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cci.htm>: "Leading the 
Institute's efforts in this area is the nationally renowned education 
researcher Jay P. Greene, Ph.D., Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow 
and endowed chair and head of the Department of Education Reform at 
the University of Arkansas.

Greene, J.P. 2006. "Education Myths: What Special Interest Groups 
Want You to Believe About Our Schools--And Why It Isn't So." Rowman & 
Littlefield. Amazon.com information at <http://tinyurl.com/2twm3r>, 
including a mini-review by Vanessa Bush:  "Researcher Greene debunks 
several purported myths at the heart of assumptions about efforts to 
reform troubled public schools. He begins with the conventional 
wisdom that increased spending on schools leads to improved 
education. Citing national statistics on school spending, Greene 
asserts that most arguments about inadequate spending are based on 
anecdotes not facts. He concludes that even if schools in poor urban 
areas were provided with more funds, there is no guarantee they would 
use the funds effectively. Other myths that he debunks: social 
problems such as poverty contribute to low academic performance, 
smaller class sizes produce improvements, certified teachers are more 
effective, teachers are underpaid, public schools' performance has 
declined, private schools are more racially segregated than public 
schools. These myths are perpetuated by powerful interest groups, 
including teachers' unions, asserts Greene. "

Hake, R.R. 1998a. "Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A 
six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory 
physics courses," Am. J. Phys. 66(1): 64-74; online at 
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/ajpv3i.pdf> (84 kB). See also 
the crucial companion paper Hake (1998b). For more recent discussion 
of this and other pre/post testing see Hake (2008).

Hake, R.R. 1998b. "Interactive-engagement methods in introductory 
mechanics courses," online at 
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/IEM-2b.pdf> (108 kB) - a crucial 
companion paper to Hake (1998a).

Hake, R.R. 2002 "Physics First: Opening Battle in the War on 
Science/Math Illiteracy?" Submitted to the American Journal of 
Physics on 27 June 2002; online at
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/PhysFirst-AJP-6.pdf> (220 kB).

Hake, R.R. 2005. "Could the U.S. Put Finnishing Touches on K-12?" online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0506&L=pod&P=R10096&I=-3>. 
Post of 20 Jun 2005 21:26:37-0700 to  AERA-C, AERA-D, AERA-G, AERA-H, 
AERA-K, AERA-L, AP-Physics, ASSESS, Biopi-L, Chemed-L, EvalTalk, 
Math-Learn, Phys-L, Physhare, PhysLrnR, Physoc, POD,  STLHE-L, & 
TeachingEdPsych,

Hake, R.R. 2007. "Should We Measure Change? Yes!" online at
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/MeasChangeS.pdf> (2.5 MB), and 
as ref. 43 at <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>. To appear as a 
chapter in "Evaluation of Teaching and Student Learning in Higher 
Education," a Monograph of the American Evaluation Association 
<http://www.eval.org/>.

Hake, R.R. 2008. "Can Distance and Classroom Learning Be Increased?" 
IJ-SoTL 2(1): January; online at 
<http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v2n1/essays_about_sotl/hake/index.htm>." 
The "International Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning" 
(IJ-SoTL)  <http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/>  is an open, 
peer-reviewed, international electronic journal containing articles, 
essays, and discussions about the scholarship of teaching and 
learning (SoTL) and its applications in higher/tertiary education 
today.

Lawhead, J. 2008. "Adding up to Nonsense," EDDRA post of Jan 12, 2008 
2:28 pm (PST); online at 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eddra/message/3877>. EDDRA is Gerald 
Bracey's "Education Disinformation Detection and Reporting Agency." 
Bracey wrote: "EDDRA is not a listserv, blog or chat room . . . . 
EDDRA currently has only two main purposes: The debunking of dis- and 
misinformation about public schools and the dissemination of accurate 
information."

Libarkin, J.C. & S.W. Anderson, 2005. "Assessment of Learning in 
Entry-Level Geoscience Courses; Results from the Geoscience Concept 
Inventory," Journal of Geoscience Education 53: 394-401; online at 
<http://www.nagt.org/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Libarkin_v53p394.pdf> 
(240 kB).

NCES. 2005. "PISA 2003 Results From the U.S. Perspective: Highlights 
International Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics Literacy and 
Problem Solving, U.S. Department of Education,  Institute of 
Education Sciences
NCES 2005-003, online at <http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005003.pdf>, 
see esp, Table 2, page 14, "Average combined mathematics literacy 
scores and subscale scores of 15-year-old students, by country: 2003."

PISA. 2006. "The Programme for International Student Assessment 
(PISA), a summary of hte main findings is online at 
<http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/13/39725224.pdf>. There Table 
5, page 53, "Range of rank of countries/economies on the mathematics 
scale," shows that U.S. 15-year-olds ranked 35th out of 57 industrial 
countries. The U.S. faired almost as poorly in science: Table 2, page 
22, "Range of rank of countries/economies on the science scale," 
shows that U.S. 15-year-olds ranked 29th out of 57 industrial 
countries.  Finland is second on the math scale, and first on the 
science scale. For lessons from the Finland/U.S. disparity see "Could 
the U.S. Put Finnishing Touches on K-12?" [Hake (2005)].

Stein, S. 1997. "Preparation of Future Teachers," Notices of the AMS 
44 (3); 311-312; online at
<http://www.ams.org/notices/199703/letters.pdf> (108 kB). Scroll down 
about two-thirds of the way from the top.

AERA Division L: Politics and Policy in Education

-----------------------------------------------------------------
 AERA Home Page on the World Wide Web: http://www.aera.net
 List Service Info http://listserv.aera.net/scripts/wa.exe
 To cancel your subscription address an email message to
 [log in to unmask] containing only the message UNSUB AERA-L
 Address problems with your subscription to: [log in to unmask]
-----------------------------------------------------------------