Page ii
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 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 study was supported by Grant No. REC-9815157 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-07567-X
Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press , 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. , Lockbox 285 , Washington, D.C. 20055 ; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2001). The power of video technology in international comparative research in education. Board on International Comparative Studies in Education, Monica Ulewicz and Alexandra Beatty, Editors. Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Printed in the United States of America
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences . All rights reserved.
Page iii
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized 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 advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Page v
BOARD ON INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE STUDIES IN EDUCATION
Andrew C. Porter (Chair), Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, School of Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Gordon M. Ambach (ex officio), Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, D.C.
David C. Berliner, College of Education, Arizona State University
Christopher T. Cross, Council for Basic Education, Washington, D.C.
Clea Fernandez, Teachers College, Columbia University
Adam Gamoran, Departments of Sociology and Educational Policy Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez, Resource Center for Science and Engineering, University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras
Jeremy Kilpatrick, Department of Mathematics Education, University of Georgia
Marlaine E. Lockheed, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Lynn W. Paine, Department of Teacher Education, Michigan State University
Janet Ward Schofield, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh
Warren Simmons, Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University
Joseph Tobin, College of Education, University of Hawaii
Colette Chabbott, Director
Monica Ulewicz, Program Officer
Jane Phillips, Senior Project Assistant
Page vi
BOARD ON TESTING AND ASSESSMENT
Eva L. Baker (Chair), The Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California, Los Angeles
Lorraine McDonnell (Vice Chair), Departments of Political Science and Education, University of California, Santa Barbara
Lauress L. Wise (Vice Chair), Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, Virginia
Richard C. Atkinson, President, University of California
Christopher F. Edley, Jr., Harvard Law School
Ronald Ferguson, John F. Kennedy School of Public Policy, Harvard University
Milton D. Hakel, Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University
Robert M. Hauser, Institute for Research on Poverty, Center for Demography, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Paul W. Holland, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey
Daniel M. Koretz, RAND Corporation, Arlington, Virginia
Richard J. Light, Graduate School of Education and John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Barbara Means, SRI International, Menlo Park, California
Andrew C. Porter, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Loretta A. Shepard, School of Education, University of Colorado, Boulder
Catherine E. Snow, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
William L. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Washington, D.C.
William T. Trent, Department of Educational Policy Studies, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Guadalupe M. Valdes, School of Education, Stanford University
Vicki Vandaveer, The Vandaveer Group, Inc., Houston, Texas
Kenneth I. Wolpin, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania
Pasquale J. DeVito, Director
Lisa D. Alston, Administrative Associate
Page vii
Preface
The Board on International Comparative Studies in Education (BICSE) was established by the National Research Council (NRC) in 1988 at the request of the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Under its initial mandate, the board monitored U.S. participation in large-scale international comparative studies. Beginning in 1998, BICSE expanded its charge to include synthesis, analysis, and strategic planning for international comparative education research and synthesis of lessons learned from past and current studies.
The Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) has been the focus of much of BICSE’s agenda in the 1990s. BICSE has monitored each phase of TIMSS and has explored methodological issues raised by the study. Though it was not the first comparative study to make use of video technology, the TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study represented one of the innovative dimensions of TIMSS’s ambitious design, and it captured the attention of the U.S. education community.
Video technology has been an important methodological tool for inquiry in classroom research for more than 40 years, and it has also been used in other international comparative research on a more limited basis. However, TIMSS triggered a great deal of enthusiasm for the use of video technology in educational research because it was the most comprehensive effort to measure student achievement ever undertaken. In addition, the TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study led to advances in digitizing video data that have revolutionized the use of this technology in education research. Consequently, both the enthusiasm about the TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study and the technical advances resulting from it have increased general interest in international video studies among education researchers and policy makers.
Page viii
In response to this interest, BICSE hosted a 1-day workshop in November 1999 to explore three issues: the potential that video technology appears to offer as a tool to enhance and expand international comparative research, the role of international video in informing educational research and professional development in the United States, and the methodological questions raised by the use of this research tool. The workshop brought together a diverse group of scholars, drawing on decades of experience with video technology, from educational anthropology, psychology, teacher education, and international comparative education. The workshop discussions provided a great deal of information and stimulating ideas for the board’s deliberations, which focused on the unique possibilities and challenges presented by international video. Our recommendations are intended to guide researchers and policy makers interested in international comparative education and in the use of video technology as a powerful methodological tool.
The board owes a particular debt of gratitude to the eight leading scholars who contributed substantively to the success of the workshop: Frederick Erickson, John Frederiksen, Drew Gitomer, Ricki Goldman-Segall, James Hiebert, Catherine Lewis, Heidi Ross, and James Stigler (see the Appendix for their affiliations). These scholars provided insightful written reflections on questions framed by the board and took the lead in the rich discussions that ensued. The board also extends sincere thanks to Magdalene Lampert and Ray McDermott for contributing their expertise to the workshop as discussion leaders.
On behalf of the board, I extend sincere gratitude to a number of people whose help was invaluable in this undertaking. Board members Clea Fernandez, Lynn Paine, and Janet Schofield took the lead in conceptualizing, planning, and synthesizing the workshop discussions. Another board member, David Berliner, was invaluable in providing support throughout the process and leading discussions. Joseph Tobin, who has subsequently joined the board, played a key role in the workshop, first by serving as a discussion leader and later by contributing to the writing of this report. Several NRC staff members deserve recognition: Patricia Morison for her leadership in guiding the board from the earliest stages of the workshop planning through the drafting of this report; Alix Beatty, for her extensive contributions to the planning of the workshop and the writing of the report; and Jane Phillips, for her able administrative support. I extend thanks to Colette Chabbott for her leadership in the later stages of the report writing phase and to Monica Ulewicz for finalizing the report. I thank Eugenia Grohman for her expert editorial advice and Kirsten Sampson Snyder for her guidance of the report through the review and production process. Thanks are also due to our sponsors at NCES and NSF for their support during the planning of the workshop, in particular Eugene Owen at NCES and Larry Suter at NSF, who have been great friends of BICSE’s work for many years.
I also thank all my fellow board members for their insightful con
Page ix
tributions to the workshop discussions and the deliberations that led to this report. Their thoughtful consideration of methodological issues in international comparative education throughout the year has been influential in the shaping of this project.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the NRC. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Ronald Gallimore, University of California, Los Angeles; Herbert Ginsburg, Columbia University; Kenji Hakuta, Stanford University; Ramsay Selden, American Institutes for Research; Reed Stevens, University of Washington; and Daniel Suthers, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Marshall Smith, Stanford University and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring panel and the institution.
Andrew C. Porter, Chair
Board on International Comparative Studies in Education
Page xi
Contents
|