Layout 1
Benchmarking for Success:
Ensuring U.S. Students Receive
a World-Class Education
A report by the National Governors Association,
the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve, Inc.
National Governors Association
Founded in 1908,the National GovernorsAssociation (NGA) is the collective voice of the nation’s gover-
nors and one of Washington,D.C.’s most respected public policy organizations.Its members are the gov-
ernors of the 50 states,three territories and two commonwealths.NGA provides governors and their
senior staff members with services that range from representing states on Capitol Hill and before the
Administration on key federal issues to developing and implementing innovative solutions to public policy
challenges through the NGA Center for Best Practices.For more information,visit www.nga.org.
Council of Chief State School Officers
The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) is a nonpartisan,nationwide,nonprofit organization
of public officials who head departments of elementary and secondary education in the states,the Dis-
trict of Columbia,the Department of Defense EducationActivity,and five U.S.extra-state jurisdictions.
CCSSO provides leadership,advocacy,and technical assistance on major educational issues.The Council
seeks member consensus on major educational issues and expresses their views to civic and professional
organizations,federal agencies,Congress,and the public.
Achieve, Inc.
Created by the nation’s governors and business leaders,Achieve is a bipartisan,non-profit organization
that helps states raise academic standards,improve assessments and strengthen accountability to prepare
all young people for postsecondary success.At the 2005 National Education Summit,Achieve launched
theAmerican Diploma Project (ADP) Network,a coalition that has grown to 34 states,educating nearly
85% of public school students in the United States.TheADP Network is committed to aligning high
school expectations with the demands of college,career and life.To learn more aboutAchieve,visit
www.achieve.org.
Copyright 2008,NGA,CCSSO,andAchieve.Copies of this publication are available from:
National GovernorsAssociation
444 N.Capitol Street NW,Suite 267
Washington,DC 20009
202-624-5300
www.nga.org
Benchmarking for Success:
Ensuring U.S. Students Receive
a World-Class Education
A report by the National Governors Association,
the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve, Inc.
Table of Contents
Foreword
1
Acknowledgements
2
International Benchmarking Advisory Group
3
I. Executive Summary
5
II.The Need for Action
9
A Skills-Driven Global Economy
9
Education for Economic Growth
10
The Equity Imperative
12
Other Countries Pulling Ahead
16
III. Five Steps Toward Building Globally Competitive Education Systems
23
Action 1: Upgrade state standards by adopting a common core of internationally
24
benchmarked standards in math and language arts for grades K-12 to ensure that
students are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to be globally competitive.
Action 2: Leverage states’ collective influence to ensure that textbooks, digital media,
26
curricula, and assessments are aligned to internationally benchmarked standards and
draw on lessons from high-performing nations and states.
Action 3: Revise state policies for recruiting,preparing,developing,and supporting
27
teachers and school leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-performing
nations and states around the world.
Action 4: Hold schools and systems accountable through monitoring,interventions,and 30
support to ensure consistently high performance, drawing upon international best practices.
Action 5: Measure state-level education performance globally by examining student
31
achievement and attainment in an international context to ensure that, over time,
students are receiving the education they need to compete in the 21st century economy.
Addressing the Equity Imperative
34
IV.The Federal Role
37
V. Conclusion
39
Appendix A: Countries Participating in International Assessments
41
Endnotes
42
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
1
Foreword
We are living in a world without borders.To meet the realities of the 21st century global economy
and maintain America’s competitive edge into the future, we need students who are prepared to
compete not only with their American peers, but with students from all across the globe for the jobs of
tomorrow.
States have voluntarily taken the lead in developing standards-based education, but policymakers lack a criti-
cal tool for moving forward—international benchmarking. This report is intended to help states take the
next steps toward ensuring that American students receive a world-class education that positions them to
compete and innovate in the 21st century.
International benchmarking will help state policymakers identify the qualities and characteristics of education
systems that best prepare students for success in the global marketplace. The stakes are high, and improving
our educational system will require commitment and insight not just from state leaders but many other
stakeholders as well. With this in mind, the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State
School Officers, and Achieve, Inc. have joined to provide to states a roadmap for benchmarking their K-12
education systems to those of top-performing nations.
The partners’ recommendations were informed by an International Benchmarking Advisory Group consist-
ing of education experts representing education institutions, the business community, researchers, former
federal officials, and current state and local officials. The Advisory Group’s expertise and experience helped
the partners identify the need for international comparisons and provide guidance for benchmarking state
education system practices in areas such as standards, accountability, educator workforce, and assessments.
The partner organizations will work with states to develop and implement these recommendations.
Governors recognize that new economic realities mean it no longer matters how one U.S. state compares
to another on a national test; what matters is how a state’s students compare to those in countries around
the globe. America must seize this moment to ensure that we have workers whose knowledge, skills, and tal-
ents are competitive with the best in the world.
Governor Janet Napolitano
Governor Sonny Perdue
Craig R. Barrett
Arizona
Georgia
Chairman of the Board
Intel Corporation
Co-Chairs, International Benchmarking Advisory Group
2
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Acknowledgements
This report was researched and written by Craig D.Jerald,president of Break the Curve Consulting in
Washington, D.C.
At the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Ilene Berman, program director in the edu-
cation division, and Dane Linn, director of the education division, supervised the project. Leadership and staff
of the National Governors Association (NGA), Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), and Achieve,
Inc. played instrumental roles in the project. The following individuals provided useful guidance and feedback
in the development of the report: Achieve, Inc. President Mike Cohen and Vice President for Advocacy and
Outreach Sandy Boyd; NGA Executive Director Ray Scheppach, NGA Center Director John Thomasian, NGA
Communications Director Jodi Omear, Senior Communications Manager Christopher Cashman, and Educa-
tion, Early Childhood and Workforce Committee Director Joan Wodiska; CCSSO Executive Director Gene
Wilhoit, Deputy Executive Director Scott Montgomery, Legislative Director Scott Frein, and Communications
Director Kara Schlosser. Within the NGA Office of Communications, Publications and Communications Man-
ager Andrea Brachtesende provided editing and design assistance.
The partner organizations extend special thanks to the members of the International Benchmarking Advisory
Group who offered valuable insights, useful data, and timely review of earlier drafts. The partners also
acknowledge the contributions of governors’ staff and chief state school officers to the report.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and GE Foundation generously supported the preparation of this
publication.
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
3
International Benchmarking
Advisory Group
To develop this report,the National GovernorsAssociation (NGA),Council of Chief State School Officers
(CCSSO), and Achieve, Inc. invited national, state, and local education and policy leaders to serve on an Interna-
tional Benchmarking Advisory Group. The Advisory Group provided the three partner organizations with valuable
insights and helped frame this bipartisan Call to Action. They collectively support the recommendations herein for
internationally benchmarking state K-12 education systems.
Co-Chairs:
Governor Janet Napolitano, Arizona
Governor Sonny Perdue, Georgia
Craig R. Barrett, Chairman of the Board, Intel Corporation
Members:
Steven A. Ballmer, Chief Executive Officer, Microsoft Corporation
Governor Donald L. Carcieri, Rhode Island
Mitchell Chester, Commissioner of Education, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education
Christopher Edley, Jr., Dean and Professor of Law, University of California–Berkeley
Chester E. Finn, Jr., President,Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Beverly L. Hall, Superintendent, Atlanta Public Schools
James B. Hunt, Jr., Chairman, the James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Policy at the
University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill and former Governor of North Carolina
Kati Haycock, President,The Education Trust
Dwight Jones, Commissioner of Education, Colorado Department of Education
Governor Tim Kaine,Virginia
Janet Murguía, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Council of La Raza
Thomas Payzant, Professor of Practice, Harvard Graduate School of Education
Charles B. Reed, Chancellor, California State University
Richard W. Riley, Senior Partner with EducationCounsel LLC, former U.S. Secretary of Education, and former
Governor of South Carolina
Andreas Schleicher, Head of the Indicators and Analysis Division, Directorate for Education, Organisation
for Economic Co-Operation and Development
William H. Schmidt, University Distinguished Professor, Michigan State University
Vivien Stewart,Vice President for Education, Asia Society
Phillip Uri Treisman, Executive Director,The Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas at Austin
Bob Wise, President, Alliance for Excellent Education and former Governor of West Virginia
I. Executive Summary
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
5
I. Executive Summary
Around the globe,governments are eagerly com- The global economy is here to stay,with recent
paring their educational outcomes to the best in
research suggesting that it is evolving and its impact
the world. The goal is not just to see how they rank,
intensifying at a stunning pace. “Globalization is hap-
but rather to identify and learn from top performers
pening faster than people think,” says Vivek Wadhwa,
and rapid improvers—from nations and states that
Wertheim Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Labor and
offer ideas for boosting their own performance. This
Worklife program and Duke University Executive in
process, known as “international benchmarking,” has
Residence. His recent research shows that compa-
become a critical tool for governments striving to cre-
nies are no longer just outsourcing production but
ate world-class education systems.
are farming out innovation as well. “Having India and
China conduct such sophisticated research and par-
In American education, “benchmarking” often simply
ticipate in drug discovery was unimaginable even five
means comparing performance outcomes or setting
years ago,” he says.
performance targets (or “benchmarks”). But in busi-
ness and among education leaders in other countries,
Education is a tremendously important lever for
it means much more. The American Productivity and
ensuring competitiveness and prosperity in the age of
Quality Center puts it this way: “Benchmarking is the
globalization, albeit not the only one. Recent eco-
practice of being humble enough to admit that
nomic studies show that high skills lead to better
someone else has a better process and wise enough
wages, more equitable distributions of income, and
to learn how to match or even surpass them.”
substantial gains in economic productivity. Higher
math performance at the end of high school trans-
Countries and states have good reason to make the
lates into a 12 percent increase in future earnings. If
effort. Technological, economic, and political trends
the United States raised students’ math and science
have combined to increase demand for higher skills
skills to globally competitive levels over the next two
while heightening competition for quality jobs. Rule-
decades, its GDP would be an additional 36 percent
bound jobs on factory floors and in offices are being
higher 75 years from now.
automated and outsourced. The world’s knowledge-
and-innovation economy favors workers who have
The race is on among nations to create knowledge-
postsecondary education or training, strong funda-
fueled innovation economies. In Singapore, Germany,
mental skills in math and reading, and the ability to
China, Brazil, Korea, and other countries around the
solve unfamiliar problems and communicate effec-
world, educational improvement is viewed as a criti-
tively.
cal part of that mission. Nations and states are there-
fore working hard to benchmark their education
At the same time, new technologies and corporate
systems to establish a solid foundation for economic
strategies have opened the global labor market to
development in the 21st century. Some are finding
billions of people from places like Eastern Europe,
innovative ways to measure their students’ progress
India, China, and Brazil who had been left out. An
internationally. Others are examining high-performing
increasing variety of work tasks can be digitized and
and fast-improving nations to learn about best prac-
performed nearly anywhere in the world. More jobs
tices that they then adapt or adopt to improve their
are going to the best educated no matter where they
own systems.
live, which means that Americans will face more
competition than ever for work.
American education has not adequately responded
to these new challenges. The United States is falling
International trade agreements, such as China’s mem-
behind other countries in the resource that matters
bership in the World Trade Organization in 2001,
most in the new global economy: human capital.
have hastened this transformation. Since 1980, global
American 15-year-olds ranked 25th in math and 21st
trade has grown 2.5 times faster than the global gross
in science achievement on the most recent interna-
domestic product (GDP). Recent estimates put
tional assessment conducted in 2006. At the same
today’s world exports at $12.5 trillion, nearly 20 per-
time, the U.S. ranked high in inequity, with the third
cent of world GDP.
largest gap in science scores between students from
different socioeconomic groups.
6
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
The U.S. is rapidly losing its historic edge in educa-
State leaders also should tackle “the equity impera-
tional attainment as well. As recently as 1995,
tive” by creating strategies for closing the achieve-
America still tied for first in college and university
ment gap between students from different racial and
graduation rates, but by 2006 had dropped to 14th.
socioeconomic backgrounds in each of the action
That same year it had the second-highest college
steps above. Reducing inequality in education is not
dropout rate of 27 countries.
only socially just, it’s essential for ensuring that the
United States retain a competitive edge.
State leaders already are deeply engaged in efforts to
raise standards, advance teaching quality, and improve
Research shows that education systems in the United
low-performing schools. International benchmarking
States tend to give disadvantaged and low-achieving
provides an additional tool for making that process
students a watered down curriculum and place them
more effective, offering insights and ideas that cannot
in larger classes taught by less qualified teachers—
be garnered solely from looking within and across
exactly opposite of the educational practices of high-
state lines. To that end, the partner organizations and
performing countries.
International Benchmarking Advisory Group call on
state leaders to take the following actions:
Action 1: Upgrade state standards by adopting a common core of internationally benchmarked
standards in math and language arts for grades K-12 to ensure that students are equipped with the
necessary knowledge and skills to be globally competitive.
Action 2: Leverage states’ collective influence to ensure that textbooks, digital media, curricula, and
assessments are aligned to internationally benchmarked standards and draw on lessons from high-
performing nations and states.
Action 3: Revise state policies for recruiting, preparing, developing, and supporting teachers and
school leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-performing nations and states around the
world.
Action 4: Hold schools and systems accountable through monitoring, interventions, and support to
ensure consistently high performance, drawing upon international best practices.
Action 5: Measure state-level education performance globally by examining student achievement
and attainment in an international context to ensure that, over time, students are receiving the edu-
cation they need to compete in the 21st century economy.
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
7
The federal government can play an enabling role as
The U.S. can take pride in many aspects of its
states engage in the critical but challenging work of
education system, from the high performance of its
international benchmarking. First, federal policymak-
teenagers on international civics tests to the strength
ers should offer funds to help underwrite the cost
of its higher education institutions.
for states to take the five action steps described
above. At the same time, policymakers should boost
But if state leaders want to ensure that their citizens
federal research and development (R&D) invest-
and their economies remain competitive, they must
ments to provide state leaders with more and better
look beyond America’s borders and benchmark their
information about international best practices, and
education systems with the best in the world. The
should help states develop streamlined assessment
state mandate to educate all students remains, but
strategies that facilitate cost-effective international
the world that students will enter after school has
comparisons of student performance.
changed.
As states reach important milestones on the way
For Andreas Schleicher, head of the Indicators and
toward building internationally competitive education
Analysis Division at the Organisation for Economic
systems, the federal government should offer a range
Co-Operation and Development’s Directorate for
of tiered incentives to make the next stage of the
Education, the case for adopting a global view to
journey easier, including increased flexibility in the use
improving education is undeniable:
of federal funds and in meeting federal educational
requirements and providing more resources to
It is only through such benchmarking that countries
implement world-class educational best practices.
can understand relative strengths and weaknesses of
Over the long term, the federal government will
their education system and identify best practices and
need to update laws to align national education poli-
ways forward. The world is indifferent to tradition and
cies with lessons learned from state benchmarking
past reputations, unforgiving of frailty and ignorant of
efforts and from federally funded research.
custom or practice. Success will go to those individuals
and countries which are swift to adapt, slow to com-
plain, and open to change.
Nations around the world are facing a new educa-
tion imperative, and many are seizing the historical
moment to provide their citizens with better oppor-
tunities and stronger economies.
America must seize this moment too, with states
leading the way. Many states already are working
hard to improve standards, teaching quality, and
accountability, but policymakers lack a critical tool—
international benchmarking.
II. The Need for Action
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
9
II. The Need for Action
Around the globe,governments are eagerly com- Skill demands within jobs are rising as well.A study
paring their educational outcomes to the best in
that analyzed typical tasks in the American workplace
the world. The goal is not just to see how they rank,
found that routine manual and cognitive tasks that
but rather to identify and learn from top performers
follow a set of prescribed rules are rapidly being
and rapid improvers—from nations and states that
taken over by computers or workers in other coun-
offer ideas for boosting their own performance. This
tries. But more sophisticated tasks are on the rise,
process, known as “international benchmarking,” has
specifically those that require workers to “bring facts
become a critical tool for governments striving to
and relationships to bear in problem solving, the abil-
create world-class education systems.
ity to judge when one problem-solving strategy is not
working and another should be tried, and the ability
In American education, “benchmarking” often simply
to engage in complex communication with others,”
means comparing performance outcomes or setting
along with “foundational skills” in math and reading.3
performance targets (or “benchmarks”). But in busi-
ness and among education leaders in other countries,
Technology is changing not just how work gets done,
it means much more: Comparing outcomes to iden-
but also where it can be done. Advances in telecom-
tify top performers or fast improvers, learning how
munications allow companies to digitize work tasks
they achieve great results, and applying those lessons
and products so that jobs can be performed virtually
to improve one’s own performance. The American
anywhere in the world. And new management soft-
Productivity and Quality Center puts it this way:
ware has enabled firms to shift from “vertical” pro-
“Benchmarking is the practice of being humble
duction—where all tasks are done in sequence in the
enough to admit that someone else has a better
same place—to “horizontal” production in which
process and wise enough to learn how to match or
tasks are carved up and shipped out to wherever
even surpass them.”1
they can be done best and cheapest. The result,
according to a blue-ribbon commission report
A Skills-Driven Global Economy
released last year, “is a world in which it is just as
easy to create work teams on four continents as it is
Governments have good reason to benchmark and
to create work teams composed of people from four
improve their education systems. Technological, eco-
divisions of the same firm located in the same city.”4
nomic, and political trends have increased demand
for higher skills while heightening competition for
While all these changes took place, political and eco-
quality jobs. In the U.S., outsourcing and automation
nomic developments opened the doors of this new
have dramatically altered the mix of jobs in the labor
global economy to more than a billion new workers
force. The proportion of American workers in blue-
from Russia, Eastern Europe, China, India, and other
collar and administrative support jobs plummeted
developing countries who now compete for jobs
from 56 percent to 39 percent between 1969 and
with those in developed nations. Harvard economist
1999, and the share of jobs requiring more education
Richard Freeman calls this “The Great Doubling” of
and specialized skills—work that is managerial, pro-
the global workforce. At first, low-skilled, low-paying
fessional, and technical in nature—increased from 23
jobs were outsourced to these workers, but now
percent to 33 percent over the same period.2
some higher skilled jobs—from analyzing X-rays to
tutoring high school students to preparing tax
returns—are migrating abroad, too.5 The twin forces
of globalization and computerization mean that any
job reducible to a set of scripted rules is vulnerable
to outsourcing or automation.6
10
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
International trade agreements, such as China’s mem-
Education for Economic Growth
bership in the World Trade Organization in 2001,
have sped this transformation along. Although some
As a result of these trends, American workers are
firms have long had global links, globalization is now
competing not only with skilled workers here, but
pervasive: More nations are joining the marketplace,
with those living in far-away places. Labor economists
more goods and services are traded globally, and
Frank Levy and Richard Murnane argue that “over
more of the production process is interconnected in
the long run, better education is the best tool we
a worldwide supply web. Since 1980, global trade has
have to prepare the population for a rapidly changing
grown 2.5 times faster than the global gross domestic
job market.”12 Studies show that higher math per-
product (GDP). Recent estimates put today’s world
formance at the end of high school translates into
exports at $12.5 trillion, nearly 20 percent of world
substantially higher future earnings; an increase of one
GDP.7
standard deviation in math scores translates into a
12 percent boost in wages.13 Family income for
Recent research suggests that globalization is not
households headed by someone with a college
only here to stay, it is evolving and intensifying at a
degree grew by nearly 40 percent from 1973 to
rapid pace. In June, Harvard and Duke University
2006, compared with less than 6 percent for families
researchers published the first in a series of studies
headed by someone with only a high school
documenting how corporations are no longer just
diploma.14
outsourcing production; they are beginning to out-
source innovation as well. For example, big pharma-
Fortune may favor the prepared mind, but it also
ceutical companies such as Merck, Eli Lilly, and
favors the prepared place—whether that place is a
Johnson & Johnson are relying on India and China not
nation, a region, or an individual state. To lay a solid
only for manufacturing and clinical trials, but also for
foundation for widespread economic growth, govern-
advanced research and development. As a result, sci-
ments around the world are adopting policies aligned
entists in those countries are rapidly increasing their
with a 21st century economy that is increasingly
ability to innovate and create their own intellectual
knowledge-fueled, innovation-driven, and global in
property; the global share of pharmaceutical patent
scope. The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation
applications originating in India and China increased
and Development (OECD) estimates that each addi-
fourfold from 1995 to 2006.8
tional year of schooling among the adult population
raises a nation’s economic output by between 3 per-
“Globalization is happening faster than people think,”
cent and 6 percent.15 New studies by Stanford econ-
says Vivek Wadhwa, the researcher and former entre-
omist Eric Hanushek and others have found strong
preneur who led the study. “Having India and China
evidence that high skills lead to elevated individual
conduct such sophisticated research and participate
wages, a more equitable distribution of income, and
in drug discovery was unimaginable even five years
substantial gains in economic productivity.16
ago.”9 Wadhwa’s team is finding the same kind of
rapid change in a wide range of industries—from
Indeed, Hanushek estimates that if the U.S. improved
telecommunications and computer networking to
enough to become a top-performing nation on inter-
aerospace and computers. Indeed, the National
national assessments between 2005 and 2025, by
Academy of Engineering recently noted that nearly
2037 its GDP would be an additional 5 percent
all of the top 20 U.S.-based semiconductor compa-
higher than if skills stayed the same. Improving human
nies have opened design centers in India, nine of
capital pays off even more handsomely over a longer
them since 2004.10 “Our take is that the global tech-
time horizon: By 2080, America’s GDP would be 36
nology landscape has changed dramatically over the
percent higher than would be the case if the U.S.
last decade,” says Wadhwa, “and that we’re at the
remained mediocre in math and science.17
beginning of a new wave of globalization.”11
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
11
The implications are clear: In today’s world, high
Even if the U.S. improves its high school and postsec-
wages follow high skills, and long-term economic
ondary graduation rates, it will be difficult if not
growth increasingly depends on educational excel-
impossible to maintain its historic dominance in the
lence. Unfortunately, American education has not
supply of educated workers. Already, America’s share
adequately responded to these challenges. As other
of the world’s college students has dropped from
countries seize the opportunity to improve their
30 percent in 1970 to less than half that today.21 And
education systems so their citizens can benefit from
because of their sheer size, China and India will sur-
new economic opportunities, the United States is
pass both Europe and the United States in the num-
rapidly losing its leading edge in the resource that
ber of secondary and postsecondary graduates
matters most for economic success: human capital.
produced over the next decade.22 Many experts have
concluded that since the U.S. can no longer compete
Four decades ago America had the best high school
in quantity of human capital, it will have to compete in
graduation rate in the world, but by 2006 it had
quality by providing its young people with the highest
slipped to 18th out of 24 industrialized countries.18
level of math, science, reading, and problem-solving
For most of the 20th century, the U.S. set the stan-
skills in the world.
dard for quality in higher education—and, in many
respects, it still does. But other countries learned
from our success and are now catching up or pulling
ahead. As recently as 1995 America was still tied for
first in the proportion of young adults with a college
degree, but by 2000 it had slipped to 9th and by
2006 to 14th—below the OECD average for the
first time.19 According to the latest OECD figures, the
U.S. has one of the highest college dropout rates in
the industrialized world.20
12
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
But so far American education has not adequately
Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)],” Education Week
responded to the skills challenge either. Out of 30
reported last year, “even as U.S. performance stood
industrialized countries participating in the OECD’s
still.”28
Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA) in 2006, the U.S. ranked 25th in math and 21st
Moreover, a 2003 PISA assessment of students’ ability
in science achievement (Figure 1). The performance
to solve real-world problems found that fewer than
gap between the United States and top-performing
half of U.S. 15-year-olds are analytical problem-
nations is huge: American students lag about a full
solvers who can communicate well about solutions.
year behind their peers in the countries that perform
Among 29 industrialized nations, the U.S. had the fifth
best in mathematics.23 Even our “best and brightest”
highest percentage of very weak problem-solvers
cannot compete with excellent students elsewhere.
and the sixth lowest percentage of strong problem-
According to the OECD, “the United States does not
solvers.29 Such results suggest that U.S. schools not
just have more students performing badly—it also
only are failing to provide many students with strong
has many fewer students performing well.”24 Amer-
foundational skills in subjects like math and science,
ica’s best math students performed worse than the
but they also are not providing enough students with
best math students in 22 other OECD nations.
the broader skills that the modern workplace
Moreover, only 1.3 percent of U.S. 15-year-olds per-
increasingly demands.
formed at the highest PISA level in mathematics,
while among the top 10 countries the share of high
Schools also must find ways to provide students with
performers was three to seven times as large.25
the “global awareness” that the globalization of work
requires.30 To collaborate on international work
American students seemed to perform better on the
teams, manage employees from other cultures and
most recent Trends in International Mathematics and
countries, and communicate with colleagues and
Science Study (TIMSS), conducted in 2003. For
clients abroad, Americans will need to know and
example, fourth-graders scored “above average” in
understand much more about the rest of the world
mathematics among participating countries while
than they do now.31 “A pervasive lack of knowledge
eighth-graders scored either above average or about
about foreign cultures and foreign languages threat-
average depending on the calculation.26 However,
ens the security of the United States as well as its
when compared only with more developed nations
ability to compete in the global marketplace and [to]
that are America’s economic competitors, U.S. per-
produce an informed citizenry,” the National Acad-
formance on TIMSS looks more like its performance
emy of Sciences warned last year.32
on PISA. In 2005, the American Institutes for
Research (AIR) analyzed a group of industrialized
The Equity Imperative
nations participating in both TIMSS and PISA; among
that group, U.S. students consistently performed
Some might argue that it is enough to produce the
below average across international assessments. “U.S.
next generation of elite “rocket scientists” who can
performance is below the 12-country average at
invent new technologies and spur innovation. There
both low- and high-skill levels and low and high-levels
is a widespread belief that providing America’s top
of item difficulty.”27
students with a world-class education is the single
most important way to boost economic growth. This
American students tend to perform better on inter-
notion is often paired with a conviction that focusing
national assessments of reading than they do in math
on educational equity for all sacrifices excellence for
and science. But U.S. 15-year-olds perform only about
the few who are already advanced. But these are
average among industrialized countries, and fourth
myths. Our national commitment to closing achieve-
graders’ reading scores have stagnated while other
ment gaps is not only compatible with a global com-
countries have made sizeable gains. “Reforms aimed
petitiveness agenda, it is essential for realizing that
at improving reading achievement seem to have pro-
agenda.
pelled Russia, Hong Kong, and Singapore from middle
to top rankings [on the Progress in International
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
13
Figure 1: U.S. 15-Year-Old Performance Compared with Other Countries
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
Average is measurably higher than the U.S.
Average is measurably lower than the U.S.
Mathematics(2006)
Science(2006)
Reading(2003)
ProblemSolving(2003)
Rank
Score
Rank
Score
Rank
Score
Rank
Score
1 Finland
548
1 Finland
563
1 Finland
543
1 Korea
550
2 Korea
547
2 Canada
534
2 Korea
534
2 Finland
548
3 Netherlands
531
3 Japan
531
3 Canada
528
3 Japan
547
4 Switzerland
530
4 New Zealand
530
4 Australia
525
4 NewZealand
533
5 Canada
527
5 Australia
527
5 NewZealand
522
5 Australia
530
6 Japan
523
6 Netherlands
525
6 Ireland
515
6 Canada
529
7 New Zealand
522
7 Korea
522
7 Sweden
514
7 Belgium
525
8 Belgium
520
8 Germany
516
8 Netherlands
513
8 Switzerland
521
9 Australia
520
9 United Kingdom
515
9 Belgium
507
9 Netherlands
520
10 Denmark
513
10 Czech Republic
513
10 Norway
500
10 France
519
11 Czech Republic
510
11 Switzerland
512
11 Switzerland
499
11 Denmark
517
12 Iceland
506
12 Austria
511
12 Japan
498
12 CzechRepublic 516
13 Austria
505
13 Belgium
510
13 Poland
497
13 Germany
513
14 Germany
504
14 Ireland
508
14 France
496
14 Sweden
509
15 Sweden
502
15 Hungary
504
15 UnitedStates
495
15 Austria
506
16 Ireland
501
16 Sweden
503
16 Denmark
492
16 Iceland
505
17 France
496
17 Poland
498
17 Iceland
492
17 Hungary
501
18 United Kingdom
495
18 Denmark
496
18 Germany
491
18 Ireland
498
19 Poland
495
19 France
495
19 Austria
491
19 Luxembourg
494
20 Slovak Republic
492
20 Iceland
491
20 CzechRepublic 489
20 SlovakRepublic 492
21 Hungary
491
21 United States
489
21 Hungary
482
21 Norway
490
22 Luxembourg
490
22 Slovak Republic
488
22 Spain
481
22 Poland
487
23 Norway
490
23 Spain
488
23 Luxembourg
479
23 Spain
482
24 Spain
480
24 Norway
487
24 Portugal
478
24 UnitedStates
477
25 United States
474
25 Luxembourg
486
25 Italy
476
25 Portugal
470
26 Portugal
466
26 Italy
475
26 Greece
472
26 Italy
469
27 Italy
462
27 Portugal
474
27 SlovakRepublic 469
27 Greece
448
28 Greece
459
28 Greece
473
28 Turkey
441
28 Turkey
408
29 Turkey
424
29 Turkey
424
29 Mexico
400
29 Mexico
384
30 Mexico
406
30 Mexico
410
OECDaverage
494
OECDaverage
500
OECD average
498
OECD average
500
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development and U.S. Department of Education.
14
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Recent studies offer compelling evidence that educa-
Learning how some countries achieve performance
tional equity is just as important for economic com-
that is both higher and more equitable has tremen-
petitiveness as it is for social justice. Hanushek and
dous implications in this country given America’s long-
colleagues specifically analyzed economic data to
term demographic outlook. Demographers now
answer this question: “Which is more important for
predict that “minorities” wil constitute the majority of
growth—having a substantial cadre of high perform-
schoolchildren by 2023 and of working-age Americans
ers or bringing everyone up to a basic level of per-
by 2039.38 In 2006, U.S. Hispanic 15-year-olds per-
formance?” They found that to truly maximize
formed below the average of every OECD country
growth, it is not enough to produce a high-achieving
except Turkey and Mexico in science literacy, and black
elite; a nation’s economic success also depends on
students performed even worse (Figure 2).39 Amer-
closing achievement gaps to ensure that all students
ica cannot remain competitive if half of its population
attain a solid foundation of knowledge and skills.33
graduates from high school so poorly prepared that it
Another recent study of 14 developed countries
is unable to thrive in the global knowledge economy.
concluded that “increasing the average level of liter-
States that plan to grow their economies must find
acy will have a greater effect on growth than increas-
ways to close their achievement gaps.
ing the percentage of individuals who achieve high
levels of literacy skills.”34
Of course, some critics of international assessments
claim that America’s disappointing performance is
But the U.S. has a long way to go before it achieves
inevitable precisely because of its demographic chal-
that goal. While American 15-year-olds rank in the
lenges. But the data do not support such beliefs:
bottom-third of developed nations in overall perform-
Overall, U.S. 15-year-olds are slightly above the inter-
ance in math and science, they rank in the top-third
national average when it comes to families’ social,
when it comes to gaps between students from differ-
economic, and cultural status.40 The problem is that
ent family backgrounds.35 In fact, the difference in sci-
America’s education system does a poor job sup-
ence scores between students from different
porting students and offering equal learning opportu-
socioeconomic backgrounds is bigger in the United
nities. According to OECD, in 2006, the U.S. ranked
States than in almost any other country.36 Fortunately,
fourth out of 30 countries in the relative impact that
international assessments also show that it is possible
socioeconomic background had on students’ PISA
to realize high average performance alongside more
science achievement.41 Another recent study measur-
equitable performance. Across several continents,
ing the impact of family background on TIMSS results
countries like Japan, Korea, Finland, and Canada
found a similar pattern: “The U.S. falls in the top quar-
demonstrate that students from disadvantaged back-
ter of the most unequal countries.”42
grounds need not automatically perform poorly in
school.37
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
15
Figure 2: U.S. Minority Performance Below Averages of Most Industrialized Nations
600
563
550
534 531 530 527 525
e
522 516 515 513 512 511 510
scor
508 504 503 500 498
500
496 495 491 489 488 488 487 486
science
475 474 473
PISA
2006 450
439
424
410 409
400
a
y
m
lic
ia
y
k
s
lic
g
y
o
Japan
alia lands
man
eden
Spain way
Ital tugal
panic key
Black
FinlandCanada
Kore
State
ZealandAustr
erland
France
Tur
Ger KingdoRepub
AustrBelgiumIrelandHungarSw AveragePoland
Denmar
Iceland
Repub
Nor embour
Por
Greece
MexicU.S.
Switz
New
Nether
ech
United vak
Lux
U.S. His
United Cz
OECD
Slo
Source: Baldi, S.,Y.Jin., M. Skemer, P.J. Green, and D. Herget. Highlights from PISA 2006: Performance of U.S. 15-Year-Old Students in Science and Mathematics Literacy in
an International Context. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, December 2007, pp. 6 &15.
16
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Other Countries Pulling Ahead
These governments are giving their people an edge
by making major efforts to improve K-12 education.
America’s global position is slipping not because U.S.
Between 2000 and 2006, Poland increased its PISA
schools are getting worse. Rather, America is losing
reading achievement by 29 points—almost a year’s
ground because its educational outcomes have
worth of learning—while decreasing the proportion
mostly stagnated while those in other countries have
of achievement variation across schools from 51 per-
surged. Nations that formerly lagged far behind the
cent to 12 percent. Improving average skills while
U.S. have caught up with and in some cases even sur-
decreasing the achievement gap is no accident:
passed it.
Poland’s major education reforms are now bearing
fruit.46
Korea, for instance, has gone from well behind to sig-
nificantly ahead of the United States in high school
Some countries are working hard to compare their
attainment in just a few generations—an education
performance internationally and to use those com-
triumph that has helped fuel the country’s tremen-
parisons to drive improvement. Mexico plans to link
dous progress (Figure 3). In 1960, Mexico’s eco-
its national assessment to PISA and has set presiden-
nomic productivity was twice as large as Korea’s, but
tial targets for 2012 and for 2030. Brazil has bench-
by 2003 Korea’s GDP was twice as large as Mexico’s.
marked every secondary school against PISA so that
According to the World Bank, “the contribution of
each one receives two scores—one benchmarked to
knowledge … was a key factor in Korea’s miracle of
the national metric and one benchmarked to PISA.
rapid economic growth.”43
The goal is to have all Brazilian secondary schools
achieving at the international average by 2021.
Other countries have made rapid strides in building
“Instead of spending years complaining that they
competitive knowledge-and-innovation economies.
don’t do well, they turned it around to talk about
“At the end of World War II, a single nation stood
what to do about it and to measure progress,” says
atop Mount Innovation, and it was the United States,”
Andreas Schleicher, head of the Indicators and Analy-
notes former Harvard Business School professor
sis Division at OECD’s Directorate for Education.47
John Kao in his 2007 book Innovation Nation. “Now,
powerful new climbers have emerged to challenge
Many nations are going beyond performance to
U.S. supremacy. … Some may be surprising—Brazil,
benchmark their policies and practices with the
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, New Zealand, Singapore,
world’s top performers—and making major strategic
and Taiwan.”44 Not surprisingly, some of those same
changes as a result. When Germany received disap-
nations also top the list of countries achieving high
pointing results on the PISA 2000 assessment, leaders
performance or seeing big gains on international
commissioned a team of experts from high-perform-
assessments.
ing and innovative countries to investigate best prac-
tices and provide advice. In 2003, the German
“Young Chinese, Indians, and Poles are not racing us
government launched a $4.6 billion package of edu-
to the bottom,” New York Times columnist Thomas
cation reforms, including a program to expand learn-
Friedman observed in 2005. “They do not want to
ing time by introducing 10,000 all-day schools across
work for us; they don’t even want to be us. They
the country.48 And by 2004, Germany’s 16 Länder
want to dominate us—in the sense that they want to
(states) began to adopt common, jointly developed
be creating the companies of the future ….”45
“national education standards”—something that pre-
viously had been considered politically daunting if not
impossible.49
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
17
Figure 3: Korea’s Education Advancement
United States
Korea
100%
97%
89%
90%
87%
88%
87%
edential
62%
cr
y
50%
secondar
37%
with
cent
P
er
0%
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
Age group
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Education at a Glance 2008. Paris: OECD,
September 2008, p. 43,Table A1.2a.
18
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Germany is not alone in its response to international
China’s educational efforts are well matched with its
assessment results. A recent evaluation of the policy
economic aspirations. In 2006, the country’s Eleventh
impact of PISA found that the assessment has had a
Five-Year-Plan put technological innovation squarely
major influence on educational policy and practice in
at the center, emphasizing the need to develop a
many OECD countries, most notably on educational
“rich talent base” and calling for the government to
standards and curricula as well as on systems of eval-
“cultivate talents with creativity and completely
uation and accountability.50
improve our capacity of self-innovation so top univer-
sities in China will become an important force for
Countries have responded to TIMSS and PIRLS
the establishment of an innovation nation.”55 A July
results as well. A 2005 study found that 10 out of 18
2008 study found that the University of California,
developing nations had changed their science curric-
Berkeley had been displaced by not one but two
ula in response to the TIMSS 1999 results, and eight
Chinese universities as the top undergraduate feeder
had changed their math curricula—including “relocat-
institutions for U.S. Ph.D. programs.56 In addition,
ing into grade 8 topics that had been taught later.”51
while America could once expect talented foreigners
Hong Kong’s reading reforms, which boosted its
studying here to stay and contribute to the U.S.
fourth-grade PIRLS achievement from significantly
economy after graduation, foreign-born specialists
below the U.S. to significantly above it, were enacted
educated in this country are increasingly returning
in response to disappointing results on the 2001
home to take advantage of new economic opportu-
assessment.52 Singapore’s impressive math and sci-
nities in their own countries.
ence performance on TIMSS assessment is hardly a
mistake; rather, the outcomes resulted from major
Many other regions and nations are working to
education reforms the country launched in response
benchmark and improve education to attract high-
to poor performance on the Second International
skilled, high-paying jobs. In 2000, the European Union
Science Study (a precursor of TIMSS) in the mid-
(EU) heads of state adopted the goal of becoming
1980s.53
“the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-
based economy in the world,” encouraging member
Vivien Stewart, vice president of the Asia Society, says
nations to introduce a host of education and other
she is often impressed by the openness and eager-
reforms. Since then, the EU has adopted educational
ness of education leaders in other countries to learn
goals that are internationally benchmarked, and pub-
from and apply international best practice. “Singa-
lishes an annual report that allows national leaders to
pore is currently at the top and China is rapidly
compare results within Europe as well as with the
improving and India is just beginning to improve, but
U.S. and other countries around the world. The 2008
they are all very interested in using international best
edition emphasizes the critical role of international
practices,” she says. “China, before it engages in any
benchmarking: “All Member States can learn from the
reforms, will send teams to examine best practices
best performers in the Union. … This is why the
around the world. Although this is mostly done at
Council asked for the three best performing coun-
the national level, it’s increasingly done at the
tries (leaders) in specific policy areas to be
province level too. China is doing this with a
identified.”57
vengeance because they traditionally have been cut
off from the rest of the world, and they want to
catch up quickly. A lot of the Chinese curriculum
reforms are based on looking at systems in other
parts of the world.”54
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
19
Such attitudes stand in stark contrast to the United
Many countries also find much to admire about
States, which so far has largely ignored the interna-
America’s higher education system and reforms
tional benchmarking movement in education. “The
around the globe have been informed by the U.S.
U.S. education system in general is very introverted,”
“You have created a public-private partnership in ter-
observes Sir Michael Barber, a former top education
tiary education that is amazingly successful,” Singa-
official in Great Britain who now focuses on interna-
pore’s Education Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam
tional benchmarking at McKinsey and Company, a
told Newsweek in 2006. “The government provides
global management consulting firm.58 The U.S. partici-
massive funding, and private and public colleges com-
pates in far fewer international benchmarking studies
pete, raising everyone’s standards.” Moreover, some
than do many other countries, especial y compared
Asian countries have looked to U.S. schools for ideas
with those working hardest to improve. In June, a
on how to encourage innovation and risk taking.
group of governors attending an NGA- and Hunt
“America has a culture of learning that challenges
Institute-sponsored seminar on educational competi-
conventional wisdom, even if it means challenging
tiveness learned that the U.S. is the only OECD coun-
authority,” says Shanmugaratnam. “These are the
try with a federal-style education system where most
areas where Singapore must learn from America.”61
state leaders have no regular and reliable information
to compare student performance international y.
But the U.S. cannot afford to rest on its past accom-
plishments. The global knowledge economy is here,
Barber argues that will need to change if the U.S.
and if state leaders want to ensure that their citizens
wants to remain competitive. “All around the world,”
can compete in it, they must seize the initiative, look-
he says, “governments are seeking insights into how
ing beyond America’s borders and benchmarking
to improve education systems, and many understand
their education systems with the best in the world.
that the only way for a country or a state to keep up
The state mandate to educate all students remains,
globally is to look at what’s happening with best prac-
but the world that schools are preparing students
tice around the world.”59
for has changed—and will continue to change—
dramatically.
Of course, the U.S. education system has strengths as
well as weaknesses, and plenty to teach other coun-
OECD’s Schleicher says the case for adopting a
tries. For example, U.S. ninth-graders scored well
global perspective on improving education is
above average on the 1999 Civic Education Study,
undeniable:
ranking sixth out of 28 countries overall and first in
students’ ability to critically interpret political informa-
It is only through such benchmarking that countries
tion. Moreover, the U.S. was one of only two coun-
can understand relative strengths and weaknesses of
tries whose students scored above average not only
their education system and identify best practices
in civics content, but also on measures of positive
and ways forward. The world is indifferent to tradi-
civic engagement and attitudes.60 Clearly, educators in
tion and past reputations, unforgiving of frailty and
emerging democracies can look to the U.S. for les-
ignorant of custom or practice. Success will go to
sons in how to prepare students for active civic
those individuals and countries which are swift to
engagement.
adapt, slow to complain, and open to change.62
20
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Myths and Realities about International Comparisons
Myth: Other countries test a more select, elite group of
This is not to say that demographics are unimportant in
students.
American schools: The U.S. ranks high in the impact that
family background has on student achievement (fourth out
Reality: That might have been true for early interna-
of 30 countries),70 in part because its education system
tional assessments, but it is no longer true today. Accord-
does a particularly poor job supporting students and equal-
ing to Jim Hull, who examined international assessments for
izing learning opportunities. For example, a 2006 study pub-
the National School Boards Association, “Since the 1990s,
lished in the European Journal of Political Economy found that
due to better sampling techniques and a move by more
out of 18 developed nations, the U.S. is the only country
countries to universal education, the results represent the
where weaker students are more likely to be enrol ed in
performance of the whole student population, including
larger classes.71 Another study found that the U.S. has one
students who attend public, private, and vocational schools,
of the largest gaps in access to qualified teachers between
students with special needs, and students who are not
students of high and low socioeconomic status.72
native speakers of their nation’s language.”63
Myth: Cultural factors prevent U.S. students from performing
While the U.S. still sets a relatively high age for compulsory
as well as those in other nations, particularly Asian countries.
education among OECD nations, that does not automati-
cally translate into higher rates of school enrollment. U.S.
Reality: U.S. 15-year-olds reported spending more time
enrollment rates in primary and secondary education are
on self study or homework in science, math, and reading
the same as or below those in other industrialized nations.
than did students on average across the 30 OECD nations
For example, among OECD member nations, the U.S.
taking the 2006 PISA assessment, including those in Japan
ranks only 22nd in school enrollment of 5- to 14-year-olds
and, except for math, in Korea.73 Moreover, high-performing
and 23rd in enrollment of 15- to 19-year-olds.64
nations and states can be found all over the world, not just
in Asia. For example, the five top-scoring nations in the
Moreover, on the most recent PISA assessment, OECD
2006 PISA science assessment were located on four differ-
member nations on average tested a higher proportion of
ent continents, reflecting a range of cultures: Europe (Fin-
15-year-olds than did the U.S. (97 percent versus 96 per-
land), North America (Canada), Asia (Japan), and Oceania
cent of those enrolled in schools, and 89 percent versus 86
(New Zealand and Australia).
percent of the entire 15-year-old population), which refutes
the idea that the U.S. was disadvantaged by testing a
Singapore is often singled out for its top performance on
broader population.65 While no assessment is perfect, PISA,
the TIMSS math assessment, which some say must be due
TIMSS, and PIRLS all have tight quality-control mechanisms,
to an unusually strong work ethic. But that belief was chal-
including very strict and transparent guidelines for sampling
lenged in a 2005 study by the American Institutes for
students and administering assessments. All exclusions
Research (AIR): “Singaporean students are hardworking, but
must be thoroughly documented and justified, and total
if Singapore’s success is attributable only to work ethic,
exclusions must fall below established thresholds.
how can we account for the fact that its high achievement
is a comparatively recent development? On the Second
Myth: The U.S. performs poorly because of poverty and
International Science Study in the mid-1980s, Singaporean
other family factors.
fourth graders scored only 13th out of 15 participating
nations, and Singaporean eighth graders did no better than
Reality: According to the U.S. Department of Education,
their U.S. counterparts …. In response to these poor
the U.S. looks about average compared with other wealthy
scores, Singapore’s Ministry of Education re-engineered and
nations on most measures of family background.66 Among
strengthened the education system, reforming both the sci-
the OECD’s 30 member nations, U.S. 15-year-olds are
ence and mathematics curriculum.”74
slightly above the international average on a composite
index of economic, social, and cultural status (ESCS); only 11
Countries such as Finland, Korea, and Hong Kong have
percent of U.S. students fal within the lowest 15 percent of
achieved major improvements in learning outcomes over
the ESCS international y.67 Moreover, America’s most affluent
time without changing their national cultures. In fact, as
15-year-olds ranked only 23rd in math and 17th in science
recently as the mid-1980s Finnish students performed only
on the 2006 PISA assessment when compared with affluent
about average among OECD nations on tests used at the
students in other industrialized nations.68 In fact, when the
time.75 Hong Kong instituted numerous reading reforms
OECD uses statistical methods to estimate how PISA
that boosted its fourth-graders’ performance from signifi-
scores would look if the ESCS index were equalized across
cantly below the U.S. in 2001 to significantly above it in
al countries—a leveling of the playing field—U.S. perform-
2006.76
ance actual y looks worse rather than better.69
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
21
Of course, cultural attitudes can play a role in achievement.
Myth: U.S. attainment rates cannot be compared with other
Studies conducted in the 1980s found that mothers and
countries’ because the U.S. tries to educate many more students.
students in some Asian countries were likely to attribute
success in math more to effort than to innate ability, while
Reality: The U.S. does rank higher than average on
the reverse was true for Americans.77 But experimental
access to higher education, but that does not explain its
studies have shown that students’ beliefs can be changed in
very low college-completion rates. While America’s entry
ways that positively impact learning; the National Mathe-
rate for four-year and advanced postsecondary programs
matics Panel recommended that such strategies be used
exceeds the OECD average by 10 percentage points (64
more widely in American classrooms.78
percent to 54 percent), its college “survival rate” trails the
OECD average by 17 points (54 percent to 71 percent).85
Myth: Other countries are less diverse.
According to OECD, “Comparatively high drop out rates in
the United States are [negatively] contributing to the
Reality: The U.S. is a diverse nation, but that diversity
United States’ relative standing against other countries” in
should not prevent states from improving student achieve-
educational attainment.86
ment. Among the 11 other OECD countries that like the
U.S. had more than 10 percent immigrant students, all of
Myth: Education does not really affect the economy anyway.
them performed higher in math and nine performed higher
A Nation at Risk warned that America’s economy would suf-
in science.79 And Singapore, which scored at the top of the
fer, but that never happened.
most recent TIMSS math assessment, is not as homoge-
neous as many assume. According to the 2005 AIR report,
Reality: While A Nation at Risk erred in linking the
“Arguments about Singapore’s homogeneity are not per-
recession of the early 1980s to educational stagnation
suasive. ... Singapore has three major ethnic groups. About
(other factors such as the business cycle are more impor-
three-fourths of Singapore’s population is Chinese, but
tant over the short term), the report was correct that
almost a quarter is Malay or Indian. Like the United States,
improving education is critical to America’s economic com-
Singapore experienced serious ethnic strife in the 1960s.”80
petitiveness. New research based on extensive data from
many countries over several decades confirms that cogni-
Cultural homogeneity has been cited as a factor in Finland’s
tive skills as measured by international tests strongly influ-
high achievement in that it lends itself to a great deal of
ence long-term economic growth.87
agreement about education and education reform. But Fin-
land’s success also is attributable to very different educa-
Other factors matter too, of course. In fact, America’s his-
tional policies and practices in areas like teacher
toric advantages in other areas have made up for its stu-
recruitment and student support.81
dents’ mediocre skills and allowed the U.S. to grow its
economy without significantly improving its schools. First,
Myth: Wealthier countries spend more than the U.S. on
the sheer size of the U.S. and its much earlier investment in
education.
mass secondary and postsecondary education gave it a sig-
Reality:
nificant numerical advantage in human capital. Second, its
The U.S. is wealthier and spends more on edu-
open and agile economy, flexible labor markets, and intel-
cation than most other countries. Among the OECD’s 30
lectual property protections enabled industry to make bet-
member nations, the U.S. ranks highest in GDP per capita
ter use of the human capital available.88
and second highest in educational expenditures.82 A report
on the U.S. economy published by OECD last year
But those historic advantages are eroding as other coun-
observed, “On average, and relative to other OECD coun-
tries imitate the U.S. example. America already has lost its
tries, U.S. students come from well-educated, wealthy fami-
lead in educational attainment, and many countries are
lies and … go to schools that are unusually well-financed.
instituting economic reforms. “Eventually, our competitors
Given any of these factors, U.S. students might be expected
will narrow our economic lead as they learn how to create
to be among the world leaders.”83 However, while the U.S.
their own versions of agility and scale,” says economist
ranks high in education spending, it ranks only near the
Anthony Carnevale. “At that point, the competition will
middle of OECD nations in its “effort” to fund education
really come down to who has the best human capital.”89
when expenditures are compared with wealth (gross
national product).84
III. Five Steps Toward Building Globally
Competitive Education Systems
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
23
III. Five Steps Toward Building Globally
Competitive Education Systems
States have both the authority and the responsibil- For example,action steps two through four address
ity to provide students with a high-quality educa-
the major elements of what can be thought of as the
tion, and state leaders already are deeply engaged in
“instructional delivery system”—the people, tools,
efforts to raise standards, improve teaching quality,
and processes that translate educational expectations
and help low-performing schools and students
into teaching and, ultimately, into learning for stu-
improve. For example, 34 states now belong to the
dents. Other countries have shown that all of these
American Diploma Project Network, an initiative
elements can be tightly aligned and focused through
dedicated to making sure that every high school
systematic reform, so they should not be considered
graduate is prepared for college or work. In those
in isolation. And because benchmarking is meant to
states, governors, state superintendents of education,
broaden the policy lens, revealing lessons that might
business executives, and college leaders are working
not be apparent in a limited state or national context,
to improve high school standards, assessments, and
state leaders should be attuned to all the ways that
curricula by aligning expectations with the demands
other nations are delivering instruction more effi-
of postsecondary education and work.
ciently and effectively—from educational technology
to school finance to governance.
International benchmarking provides an additional
tool for making every state’s existing education policy
Finally, higher education leaders should be asked to
and improvement process more effective, offering
join international benchmarking efforts as full partici-
insights and ideas that cannot be garnered by exam-
pants so existing initiatives are better coordinated
ining educational practices only within U.S. borders.
with pre–K-12 and higher education policies through
State leaders can use benchmarking to augment their
P-16 councils and other mechanisms. For example,
“database of policy options” by adding strategies sug-
higher education plays a key role in the recruitment
gested by international best practice to the range of
and training of teachers and an increasingly impor-
ideas already under consideration. Indeed, interna-
tant role in ensuring that high school graduation stan-
tional benchmarking should not be a stand-alone
dards reflect college- and career-readiness
project, but rather should function as a critical and
requirements. Partnering with higher education also
well-integrated component of the regular policy plan-
will facilitate a robust discussion about college gradu-
ning process.
ation rates, which are very low in the United States
and have contributed to the erosion of America’s
The following action steps were carefully chosen to
preeminence in higher education. Since the responsi-
help states focus their efforts on the policy areas that
bility probably lies both with K-12 preparation and
have both a high impact on student performance and
with higher education practice, leaders from both
also a high potential for best practice learning—in
sectors should work together to ensure that attain-
other words, where existing research has shown sig-
ment rates are internationally competitive.
nificant differences in how high-performing nations or
states organize education compared with traditional
approaches in most U.S. states. However, this should
not be viewed as a static checklist. Benchmarking is a
process of discovery as well as adaptation, and state
leaders should keep an open mind as they collect
information on practices abroad to expand their pol-
icy toolkits.
24
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
The Action Steps
topics, resulting in too much repetition across
grades. “In the United States the principle that
Action 1: Upgrade state standards by adopting a
seems to guide our curriculum development is
common core of internationally benchmarked stan-
that you teach everything everywhere,” says
dards in math and language arts for grades K-12 to
Michigan researcher Schmidt,“because then
ensure that students are equipped with the neces-
somehow somebody wil learn something some-
sary knowledge and skills to be globally competitive.
where.”92
Research has revealed striking similarities among the
math and science standards in top-performing nations,
To upgrade state standards, leaders will be able to
along with stark differences between those world-
leverage the Common State Standards Initiative, an
class expectations and the standards adopted by most
upcoming joint project of NGA, CCSSO, Achieve, the
U.S. states. According to Bil Schmidt, a Michigan State
Alliance for Excellent Education, and the James B.
University researcher and expert on international
Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Pol-
benchmarking, standards in the best-performing
icy. The initiative will enable all states to adopt coher-
nations share the fol owing three characteristics that
ent and rigorous standards in K-12 math, reading, and
are not commonly found in U.S. standards:
language arts that are fully aligned with college and
career expectations and also internationally bench-
marked against leading nations. Achieve is developing
Focus. World-class content standards cover a
an important tool for the initiative: a set of voluntary,
smaller number of topics in greater depth at
globally competitive reference standards based on
every grade level, enabling teachers to spend
the existing American Diploma Project (ADP) frame-
more time on each topic so that all students
work. Because of how it was originally developed, the
learn it well before they advance to more difficult
ADP framework already reflects the skills necessary
content. In contrast, state content standards in
to succeed in college and in well-paying jobs in
the U.S. typically cover a large number of topics
today’s labor market. Achieve is now working to fur-
in each grade level—even first and second grade.
ther calibrate the framework to reflect international
U.S. schools therefore end up using curricula that
expectations as well as recent research on college
are “a mile wide and an inch deep.”
and career readiness.
Rigor. By the eighth grade, students in top-
A key goal of the initiative will be to ensure that stan-
performing nations are studying algebra and
dards reflect all three of the critical dimensions
geometry, while in the U.S., most eighth-grade
exemplified by high-performing nations—not only
math courses focus on arithmetic. In science,
rigor but also focus and coherence. In a study pub-
American eighth-graders are memorizing the
lished last year, Schmidt and a colleague found that
parts of the eye, while students in top-perform-
trying to cover too many topics per grade clearly has
ing nations are learning about how the eye
a negative influence on student learning, even when
actually works by capturing photons that are
the order of topics is otherwise coherent. At the
translated into images by the brain.90 In fact, the
eighth-grade level, the researchers found “a decrease
curriculum studied by the typical American
of fifty in the number of intended topics and grade
eighth-grader is two full years behind the curricu-
combinations would predict an increase in achieve-
lum being studied by eighth-graders in high-
ment of almost three-fourths of a standard deviation.
performing countries.91
… The amount of ‘clutter’ created by covering too
many topics … must be kept small.”93 Therefore, the
Coherence. Math and science standards in top-
internationally benchmarked common core of stan-
performing countries lay out an orderly progres-
dards should not be seen as an addition to existing
sion of topics that fol ow the logic of the
standards, but rather the foundation for states to
discipline, al owing thorough and deep coverage
establish rigorous standards that also are fewer and
of content. In contrast, standards in many U.S.
clearer (Figure 4).
states resemble an arbitrary “laundry list” of
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
25
Figure 4: Mathematics Topics in Content Standards of 21 States
Topic
Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade
1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8
Wholenumbermeaning
Wholenumberoperations
Measurementunits
Commonfractions
Equationsandformulas
Bold yellow line
Datarepresentationandanalysis
shows content
2-Dgeometry:basics
coherence
Polygonsandcircles
typical of top-
Perimeter,areaandvolume
performing
Roundingandsignificantfigures
countries
Estimatingcomputations
Propertiesofwholenumberoperations
Estimatingquantityandsize
Decimalfractions
Relationshipofcommonanddecimalfractions
Propertiesofcommonanddecimalfractions
Percentages
Proportionalityconcepts
Proportionalityproblems
2-Dcoordinategeometry
Geometry:transformations
Negativenumbers,integers,andtheirproperties
Numbertheory
Exponents,rootsandradicals
Exponentsandordersofmagnitude
Measurementestimationanderrors
Constructionsw/straightedge/rulerandcompass
3-Dgeometry
Congruenceandsimilarity
Rationalnumbersandtheirproperties
Patterns,relations,andfunctions
Slopeandtrigonometry
Intendedby67percentofthe21states
Intendedby83percentofthe21states
Intendedbyallofthe21states
Source: Schmidt,W.H., C.H.Wang, and C.C. McKnight. Curriculum Coherence:An Examination of U.S. Mathematics and Science
Content Standards from an International Perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies 37, no. 5, 2005, pp. 525-559. (p. 541, Figure 4)
26
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
The same is true when it comes to the components of
Action 2: Leverage states’ collective influence to
the curriculum. Schmidt and colleagues found that the
ensure that textbooks, digital media, curricula, and
coherence typical of math standards in high-performing
assessments are aligned to internationally bench-
countries “is translated into textbooks, workbooks,
marked standards and draw on lessons from high-
diagnostic tests for teacher use, and other classroom
performing nations and states.
materials that enable teachers to bring the curriculum
into the classroom in a relatively consistent, effective
Research shows that top-performing countries sup-
way. In turn, the curriculum serves as an important
port rigorous, coherent standards with a wide range
basis for the nation’s preservice teacher education and
of tightly aligned instructional tools—from assess-
for ongoing professional development.”95
ments to classroom curriculum materials. In the U.S.,
while each state retains its own authority to make
While textbooks are only one of many kinds of
decisions in those areas, states can more efficiently
instructional tools, they usefully illustrate the power
reflect international best practice by working cooper-
of state collaboration to address international best
atively on ways to upgrade those elements of their
practice. Researchers have found that U.S. textbooks,
standards-based education systems.
compared with those used in high-performing coun-
tries, are less aligned with standards and much less
Assessment offers a good example. Top-performing
focused and coherent in the topics they cover. “If you
countries administer assessments that are more rigor-
look at U.S. textbooks,” Schmidt and colleagues
ous and better aligned with standards than the tests
observe, “you’ll find there is no textbook in the world
U.S. students typically take. For example, AIR found
that has as many topics as our mathematics text-
that Singapore’s math assessments expect greater
books, bar none.”96 For example, common elemen-
rigor and depth in mathematical knowledge; to test
tary math textbooks in the U.S. cover almost twice as
that knowledge, they employ fewer multiple choice
many topics per grade as do Singapore’s. As a result,
questions and more problems that require multistep
math textbooks in Singapore expect students to
solutions and finding unknowns. In fact, Singapore’s
complete about one thorough lesson on a single
sixth-grade assessment proved more challenging than
topic per week, while U.S. students are expected to
the eighth-grade math tests given in seven states as
complete about one lesson on a narrowly focused
well as the eighth-grade National Assessment of
topic each day.97
Educational Progress.94
The problem is not simply a lack of focus and coher-
Such assessments typically are more expensive to
ence in individual state standards, but also a lack of
develop and administer than the multiple-choice
agreement across state standards. Publishers of math
exams commonly used in the U.S. However, states
textbooks market them nationally by cramming them
can save time and money by sharing resources and
with enough topics to cover states’ widely divergent
expertise to develop high-quality voluntary assess-
standards. The Common State Standards Initiative
ments or a common pool of assessment items. That
partly solves this problem by providing a more
kind of collective effort also can ensure the availabil-
focused and coherent set of expectations around
ity of voluntary assessments or assessment items that
which to develop textbooks and digital media. By
are aligned with the internationally benchmarked
working in concert to address concerns about length,
standards to be developed through the Common
focus, and coherence with commercial publishers,
State Standards Initiative.
states can ensure that new expectations for text-
books, digital media, and other instructional materials
are being addressed by the industry.
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
27
Finally, states can pool resources to develop entirely
In contrast, the U.S. teacher pipeline seems to dis-
new tools, such as replacement units or diagnostic
courage individuals with competitive academic skills
assessments that align with internationally bench-
from entering and remaining in the profession. Col-
marked standards. In doing so, leaders should collab-
lege students with high SAT and ACT scores are less
orate to ensure that curriculum supports take
likely to train to become teachers, less likely to take a
advantage of the newest technologies, including mul-
teaching job, and less likely to stay in the classroom
timedia strategies, to support instruction. Harvard
after a few years.103 The likelihood that a highly tal-
Business School professor Clayton Christensen pre-
ented female in the top 10 percent of her graduating
dicts that by 2019 half of all high school courses will
class would become a teacher shrank by half, from
be delivered online.98 Some research indicates that
about 20 percent to about 10 percent, between
countries are pursuing a wide range of strategies and
1964 and 2000.104
goals to encourage the use of computers and infor-
mation technology for instruction, suggesting that
Top-performing nations and provinces also use a
there might be much to learn in this area from inter-
range of strategies to provide teachers with excellent
national benchmarking.99
training and ongoing professional development—
both of which are mostly mediocre in the United
Action 3: Revise state policies for recruiting, prepar-
States. An international study released last year by
ing, developing, and supporting teachers and school
the International Association for the Evaluation of
leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-
Educational Achievement (IEA) and Michigan State
performing nations and states around the world.
University found that college students preparing to
be teachers have weaker knowledge of mathematics
Beyond establishing world-class educational stan-
and take less rigorous math courses than those in
dards, high-performing nations also adopt policies to
other countries. “What’s most disturbing is that one
ensure that students receive the best instruction pos-
of the areas in which U.S. future teachers tend to do
sible. Recent studies have identified major differences
the worst is algebra, and algebra is the heart of mid-
in how top-performers and fast-improvers recruit,
dle school math,” say Bill Schmidt, who directed the
train, and support their teachers and school leaders
study.105
compared with the policies in place in most U.S.
states. Tackling these challenges can yield big divi-
Top-performing nations are going well beyond
dends. Studies by U.S. researchers have found that
recruitment and initial training to build a 21st century
assigning students to strong teachers for three years
teaching force, however. According to Schleicher and
in a row can boost their test scores by as much as 50
Stewart, “These countries are abandoning the tradi-
percentile points above what they would gain with
tional factory model, with teachers at the bottom of
three ineffective teachers in a row.100
the production line receiving orders from on high, to
move toward a professionalized model of teachers as
According to a study by Sir Michael Barber and
knowledge workers. In this model, teachers are on a
Mona Mourshed of McKinsey and Company, the
par with other professionals in terms of diagnosing
best-performing nations begin by recruiting top talent
problems and applying evidence-based practices and
to the teaching profession: Korea recruits from the
strategies to address the diversity in students’ inter-
top 5 percent of graduates, Finland the top 10 per-
ests and abilities.”106 Such countries recognize that
cent, and Singapore the top 30 percent. The McKin-
quality of classroom instruction is the most critical
sey researchers found that some countries
element of any education system, and they work to
accomplish this by setting a high initial bar and limit-
build cultures that combine high expectations with
ing access to teacher training to prevent an oversup-
strong support and empowerment of teachers.
ply of candidates—especially weak ones—which,
along with other strategies, raises the status of the
profession and aids in recruitment.101 “Finns have
come to cherish good educators as Texans do ace
quarterbacks,” Kao writes in Innovation Nation.102
28
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
However, bolstering teacher professionalism does not
Singapore’s approach to developing leaders is widely
mean asking teachers to create everything from
admired too. Singapore screens prospective school
scratch. Korea’s Institute for Curriculum and Evalua-
leaders using a rigorous process and then provides a
tion operates a Teaching and Learning Center that
six-month training program run by the National Insti-
offers information about the national curriculum; pro-
tute of Education. The program includes manage-
motes aligned instructional practices; and provides
ment and leadership courses from leading executive
educators with a wide range of teaching materials,
training programs; one day per week spent in schools
guidelines, and assessment tools.107 The New Zealand
to come up with innovative solutions to practical
Ministry of Education has supported development of
problems; group projects; two-week overseas place-
tools for formative assessment, including Assessment
ments with major corporations; and rigorous evalua-
Tools for Teaching and Learning, which can be used
tion.111 Great Britain recently revamped its national
to assess literacy and numeracy of upper elementary
approach to developing principals based on a careful
and lower secondary students, as well as national cur-
study of that model.112
riculum exemplars in all subject areas. Teachers use
the tools to evaluate the impact of instruction on
Sir Michael Barber emphasizes that there are impor-
student learning and adjust teaching to better meet
tant lessons for improving teaching and leadership
students’ needs.108
that can be adapted and applied across nations—and
vigorous policy efforts can result in rapid improve-
Based on conversations with many local educators
ments. When the British government surveyed adults
across the United States, Education Trust President
aged 24 to 35 in the year 2000 about switching jobs,
Kati Haycock underscores that benchmarking efforts
teaching ranked 92nd out of 150 career choices. But
should consider the immediate concerns of class-
in a follow-up survey conducted in 2005, after
room teachers: “What do the leading countries do
improvements to teacher training coupled with a vig-
with children who arrive behind? What is interna-
orous marketing campaign, teaching came out on
tional best practice for improving the performance of
top.113 “Our benchmarking suggests that the same
language minorities? How do teachers differentiate
broad policies are effective in different systems irre-
instruction without losing sight of rigorous stan-
spective of the cultural context in which they are
dards?”109 Since educators ultimately will be responsi-
applied,” Barber and Mourshed conclude in their
ble for ensuring that students meet the new globally
report.114 U.S. state leaders could learn much from
competitive standards, policymakers should take care
such examples; particularly during the current eco-
to incorporate such questions into their benchmark-
nomic downturn, there might be many adults with
ing research.
strong content backgrounds who could be induced
to switch to a career in teaching.
Top nations and states also focus on developing
excellent school leaders and charge principals with
In the U.S., costs related to human capital account for
ensuring that teachers provide consistently high-
the vast majority of education spending. The goal for
quality instruction. The state of Victoria in southeast-
international benchmarking should be to ensure the
ern Australia recently implemented an intensive strat-
most effective and efficient use of funds for prepara-
egy to improve educational leadership that has been
tion, recruitment, training, ongoing development, and
dubbed “cutting edge” by international experts. The
support. This will require a careful examination of
strategy is closely aligned with the state’s comprehen-
how higher education institutions and systems in top-
sive effort to improve schools and includes a rigorous
performing countries are structured to encourage
principal selection process; mentoring programs for
young people to enter the teaching field and prepare
new principals and a coaching program for experi-
them to become quality instructors at the elemen-
enced ones; a “balanced scorecard” approach to prin-
tary and secondary level.
cipal performance management; an accelerated
program for high-potential leaders; and a program to
develop high-performing principals. The government
has established 19 separate leadership-development
opportunities, each firmly rooted in research and
best practice (Figure 5).110
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
29
Figure 5: Leadership Development Opportunities in Victoria, Australia
Aspirant Assistant
Name of Programme
Open to
Description
leaders principals Principals
Master in School Leadership
All after 5 years teaching
Taught modules, in-school elements and
√
√
√
mentoring or shadowing; 2 years
Building capacity for
Briefing, residential and day workshops, coaching
Teams of teachers
√
√
√
improvement
support and feedback; 1 year
Building the capacity of
Three-day residential, action research in school,
School leadership teams
√
√
√
school leadership teams
3 coaching sessions, follow-up workshop; 1 year
Three 1-day forums, action learning project,
Leading across effective
Small school teams
Web-based support, mentor with small school
√
√
√
small schools
experience; 1 year
Leading in effective schools
Briefing, preparatory activities and 360-degree
High potential leaders
√
√
(strategic planning)
feedback, two workshops, 4 coaching sessions
and ongoing e-mail contact; 1 year
Two-day conference, four-day workshops, background
Preparing for leadership
√
Experienced teachers
reading, pre- & post-programme 360-degree
feedback, school based project, shadowing; 1 year
Five days workshops, reading and data collection,
Leading for student learning
Expert teachers
√
360-degree feedback, peer learning groups; 1 year
Leading professional learning
Professional development
One year part-time programme
√
√
coordinators
Scholarships for postgraduate
Postgraduate teachers
Range of postgraduate courses
√
√
study
Eleanor Davies school
Five months including mentoring, reading,
Female leading teachers / APs
√
√
leadership programme
seminars, school based project
One year with workshops and strategic
Leaders in the making
Assistant principals
√
√
planning project
Stepping up to the
One year, including data-collection, workshop,
Assistant principals
√
principalship
shadowing, reviews
Educational leadership:
One year, including preparation, intensive
√
√
shaping pedagogy
APs and principals
workshop, review, feedback, action planning
Human leadership: developing
APs and principals
One year, development and implementation
√
√
people
of a professional learning plan
Technical leadership: thinking
APs and principals
√
√
and planning strategically
One year, including strategic planning project
Mentoring for first time
First time principals
√
principals
One year
Coaching to enhance the
capabilities of experienced
Experienced principals
One year with assigned coach
√
principals
Over a two-year period including contribution to
Development programme for
system development and individual professional
√
high performing principals
Principals
development
Building the capacity of the
Principals of small schools
√
principals of small schools
One year
Teachers professional leave
All teachers
30 days
√
Source: Matthews, P., H. Moorman, and D. Nusche. In Pont, B., D. Nusche, and D. Hopkins (Eds.), Improving School Leadership,Volume 2: Case Studies on System
Leadership. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris: OECD, 2008, pp. 179–213. (p. 196, Box 7.5)
30
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
individual or small-group support to students who
Action 4: Hold schools and systems accountable
need it, mainly in Finnish language arts and mathe-
through monitoring, interventions, and support to
matics. On average, about 30 percent of students
ensure consistently high performance, drawing
receive such additional help every year, sometimes
upon international best practices.
even the best students. The goal is to identify any
student who is having difficulty at a particular point in
Top-performing nations exhibit a wide range of differ-
time and get that student caught up and able to han-
ent approaches to the functions commonly defined
dle a rigorous classroom curriculum.118
in the U.S. under the rubric of “accountability.” But
recent research suggests that such nations share sev-
In Singapore, schools use a national examination to
eral key strategic priorities and employ a broader
identify upper elementary grade students who are
range of tools for managing those priorities than is
having difficulty in math. Those students then receive
evident in this country.
special instruction based on an adapted curriculum
framework taught by trained Mathematics Support
First, most high-performing nations use multiple
Teachers. Importantly, they also receive about 30 per-
mechanisms to monitor school performance, includ-
cent more math instruction than their peers so that
ing annual student assessments in key grades and
they can cover the same rigorous content, only at a
whole-school reviews or “inspections.” Such inspec-
slower pace.119
tions evaluate the performance of a school against a
broad set of criteria, including, but not limited to, stu-
According to Schleicher and Stewart, many of the
dent achievement and also examine the school prac-
countries that perform well on PISA have established
tices that contribute to student results. Inspections
strong norms and mechanisms to support students.
take many different forms in different countries,
Teachers in such countries “don’t have the option of
including annual reviews conducted by an external
making students repeat the school year—retention is
agency; annual self evaluations complemented by an
not permitted—or transferring students to schools
external review every few years; and self reviews cou-
with lower performance requirements,” they say.
pled with external reviews on a much more occa-
“Even where retention or transfers are technically
sional basis, often initiated by schools themselves.115
possible, incentive structures for teachers and schools
New York City recently adopted a system of school
encourage teachers to address and solve challenges
inspections based on the British model.116
rather than hand them to others.”120
One advantage of such an approach is that leaders
Moreover, a thoughtful approach to accountability
can more precisely diagnose the root causes of
can help ensure that students experience a curricu-
underperformance and, consequently, better match
lum consistent with state standards and also that aca-
interventions with specific needs. According to a
demic expectations do not vary too much across
benchmarking report commissioned by Achieve for
schools and classrooms. Even though Finland has an
the state of Ohio, the British system “takes account
educational culture that greatly values the autonomy
of each school’s day-to-day working and its capacity
granted to local educators, its government recently
for change. … When [the Office for Standards in
tightened the national core curriculum after evalua-
Education] finds poor student outcomes and poor
tions revealed too many gaps between students’
quality leadership, for instance, it calls for stronger
classroom grades and their assessment results.
measures than it would for a school with bad test
“Another reason for the new approach is the fact
scores but competent leadership.”117
that students use their final school reports in basic
education when applying to upper secondary educa-
Second, some top-performing countries have
tion institutions,” says Reijo Laukkanen of the Finnish
adopted policies to ensure that every student suc-
National Board of Education. “Thus, the new rules
ceeds by monitoring students’ progress and interven-
also safeguard the equality of students.”121
ing to prevent them from falling too far behind. In
Finland, every school employs “special education
teachers” who receive additional training to provide
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
31
Finally, top-performing nations balance accountability
In the U.S., governors and chief state school officers
with greater school autonomy. A number of studies
would welcome the opportunity to compare student
based on PISA,TIMSS, and PIRLS have found that stu-
performance international y. However, state leaders
dents perform better in systems that give schools
are concerned about the number of tests students
greater freedom to hire and reward teachers, pur-
already are required to take for various purposes as
chase supplies and make other school-specific budget
wel as the costs of administering additional assess-
allocations, and choose curriculum materials and
ments. Currently the U.S. is characterized by an overly
teaching methods.122 Those studies also show that
cumbersome and fragmented testing system in which
decentralization works best when it is combined with
the federal government, states, districts, and schools
various forms of accountability. According to one
together administer many different assessments to
team of researchers, the positive impact of school
meet a wide variety of purposes.
autonomy coupled with choice and accountability
amounts to more than one-and-a-half grade-level
Therefore, states can best address this action step
equivalents on the PISA assessment.123
through cooperative action to find a streamlined and
cost-effective solution for generating international
In general, however, there is still much to learn about
student achievement comparisons. Since all states
forms of accountability in other nations. One area
already are required to participate in the National
that states might examine closely as part of their
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), leaders
benchmarking work is how other nations use assess-
can use their collective leverage to work with the
ment for accountability. What kinds of assessments
National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) to
do they administer in which grades and subjects?
explore the feasibility of upgrading NAEP to yield
What content and skills do those tests measure?
results that are comparable with existing international
What kinds of questions do they use—multiple
assessments such as TIMSS, PIRLS, and PISA. The
choice or more open-ended problems? How are
strategy should permit states to secure representa-
assessments scored? And how are the results pub-
tive school-level samples to analyze the relationship
lished and used for accountability purposes?
between school-level practices and student achieve-
ment, which in turn would enable leaders to craft
Action 5: Measure state-level education perform-
policies promoting more widespread use of effective
ance globally by examining student achievement and
practices.
attainment in an international context to ensure that,
over time, students are receiving the education they
Adapting NAEP to yield internationally comparable
need to compete in the 21st century economy.
results will be easier to accomplish in the case of
TIMSS and PIRLS. TIMSS is more closely aligned with
As states establish world-class standards and adopt
NAEP, and they both assess students in math and sci-
other policies based on international best practice,
ence in grades four and eight. Similarly, PIRLS tests
leaders will want information on whether students
students in reading in grade four, though a recent U.S.
are benefiting from the changes and are meeting
Department of Education study found that PIRLS
higher expectations. “States are no longer competing
incorporates easier reading passages than NAEP
with just the states next door but with countries
while also assessing some kinds of reading tasks that
around the world,” argues Vivien Stewart. “Their stu-
NAEP does not.125
dents are competing with students in Singapore,
Shanghai, and Salzburg; it’s important to have a sense
Since PISA assesses 15-year-olds in participating
of whether they are being prepared to thrive in a
nations, NAGB would need to explore how to adjust
global, knowledge-based economy.”124 Over time such
NAEP samples to include a comparable group of
data also can help prevent newly upgraded, interna-
young people, as wel as how to incorporate the
tionally benchmarked state standards from slipping
more open-ended assessment items that characterize
back below globally competitive levels.
PISA. (PISA relies on “constructed response” items
over multiple choice questions by a margin of two to
In most industrialized countries with a federal-style
one, while the reverse is true for TIMSS and NAEP.126)
education system, state leaders already have access to
However, many consider PISA to be an important
that kind of information because most take part in
complement to TIMSS and PIRLS because, while the
PISA at state levels and some also participate in TIMSS.
majority of countries participating in TIMSS are low-
32
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
and middle-income countries, PISA focuses on the
istrations of TIMSS and PIRLS in 2011. While no U.S.
lead industrialized countries that are the main eco-
state has yet participated in PISA, most federal educa-
nomic competitors of the United States (Appendix
tion systems around the world—including Australia,
A, pg. 41). In addition, PISA assesses students near
Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Spain,
the end of compulsory education on whether they
Switzerland, and the United Kingdom—have worked
can apply what they have learned in math, science,
with OECD to report PISA results for states or
and reading to solve real-world problems.
provinces. Across OECD nations, state-level results
are generated using a variety of strategies, offering U.S.
Governors, chief state school officers, and other lead-
states several proven models to consider.
ers also should work to develop assessments that
indicate whether students are on track for college
A few nations and states have experimented with
readiness. The best example of such an initiative is
approaches that do not require students to take the
California’s Early Assessment Program (EAP), a col-
ful international assessment every few years. One
laborative effort among the California State Board of
option is to embed a selection of PISA or TIMSS items
Education, the California Department of Education,
into existing state assessments. Another is to generate
and California State University (CSU). EAP allows
a statistical “link” using NAEP tests that can then be
students to take an additional component of the
used to estimate state PISA or TIMSS performance.
Grade 11 California Standards Test in reading and
Such options are less expensive, and in practice are
mathematics. The results provide an “early warning”
less burdensome on schools that must administer the
that signals the student’s college-readiness status; stu-
tests, but what they save in dol ars, time, and effort,
dents who meet the benchmark are exempt from
they sacrifice in depth of data, since policymakers wil
having to take the CSU placement test, which is nor-
not be able to dig beneath overal averages.
mally given to students after they enroll.127 Fourteen
states in the American Diploma Project Network are
In addition to achievement, state leaders should
developing a common end-of-course exam for Alge-
gather information to compare educational attain-
bra II that is intended to serve the same purpose.
ment with top-performing and fast-improving nations,
starting with indicators published by the OECD in its
Of course, each state has the authority to make its
annual Education at a Glance report. Many of the raw
own decisions regarding assessment and leaders
data necessary are already collected by federal statis-
always can choose to administer one or more of the
tical agencies. For the OECD’s 2008 report, the
existing international tests. For many policymakers,
United States provided comparable data on the fol-
the most significant difference between TIMSS and
lowing key indicators:
PISA is in the type of content and skills each assesses.
• Percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who have
According to an analysis by the U.S. Department of
attained at least a high school degree;
Education, “TIMSS and NAEP appear to have the
most in common, with a focus on material that is
• Percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who have
more likely to be taught through the school curricu-
attained a postsecondary degree;
lum than PISA, which is more situation and phenom-
• Upper secondary graduation rate;
ena-based. … TIMSS and PISA differ in a number of
respects, including a greater focus on factual knowl-
• Postsecondary entry rate;
edge in mathematics and science in TIMSS than in
• Postsecondary graduation and completion rates;
PISA, and a greater focus on problem solving and the
and
critical evaluation of information in PISA than in
• Number of postsecondary science degree holders
TIMSS. Moreover, PISA has a greater focus on data
per 100,000 employed among 25- to 34-year-olds.
analysis, statistics and probability in mathematics than
either TIMSS or NAEP [Table 1].”128
Finally, state leaders should create an explicit plan to
ensure that their investment yields more than a new
Some U.S. states already have participated in the
set of numbers—including a strategy for communi-
TIMSS assessment, including Massachusetts and Min-
cating the results; a strategy for analyzing the results
nesota in 2007. The IEA and the U.S. Department of
to dig beneath averages and identify significant pat-
Education are working to develop cost models for
terns, strengths, and weaknesses; and the designation
various levels of state participation in the next admin-
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
33
Table 1. The Three Major International Assessments
PISA
TIMSS
PIRLS
Sponsor
OrganisationforEconomic
Co-OperationandDevelopment
InternationalAssociationfor
theEvaluationofEducational
InternationalAssociationfor
Achievement
theEvaluationofEducational
Achievement
Gradesoragestested
15-year-olds
Fourthandeighthgraders
Fourthgraders
Subjectstested
Math,science,andreadingevery
threeyears;specialproblemsolving Mathandscience
Reading
assessmentin2003
Contenttested
Abilitytoapplymath,science,and
readingtosolvereal-worldproblems Attainmentofknowledge
andskillsinmathandscience
Readingcomprehensionskills
curriculum
Testingcycle
Every3years
Every4years
Every5years
Lastadministration
2006
2007
2006
Nextadministration
2009
2011
2011
Costforstateparticipation 2009: $250,000to$550,000
dependingonlevelofparticipation
2007: $600,000forfullparticipa-
tionincluding
2011: Tobedetermined
both 4th and 8th
grades,or$350,000forafull
sampleinjustonegrade
2011: Tobedetermined
Typeoftestquestions
Abouttwo-thirdsconstructed
responseandone-thirdmultiple
Aboutone-thirdconstructed
Aboutone-halfconstructed
choice
responseandtwo-thirds
multiplechoice
responseandone-halfmultiple
choice
Sub-topicsforwhich
scoresarereported
Math (2003): Quantity; space and
shape;changeandrelationships;
Math: Grade 4–Number; pat-
Readingforliterarypurposes;
uncertainty
ternsandrelationships;measure-
ment;geometry;data.Grade
readingforinformational
purposes;retrievingand
Science (2006): Overall knowledge;
knowledgeaboutearthandspace;
8–Number;algebra;measure-
straightforwardinferencing;
knowledgeaboutlivingsystems;
ment;geometry;data
interpreting,integrating,and
knowledgeaboutphysicalsystems;
Science: Grade 4–Life science;
evaluating
identifyingscientificissues;explaining physicalscience;earthscience.
phenomenascientifically;using
Grade8–Lifescience;chemistry;
scientificevidence
physics;earthscience;environ-
mentalscience
Reading (2000): Retrieving informa-
tion;interpretingtexts;reflectionand
evaluation
Technicalalignmentwith
NAEP:Canscoresbe
Littlealignment;notenoughtocross- Significantalignment;enoughfor Unknown
equatedtoNAEP?
walkscalesandscores
someresearcherstocrosswalk
scalesandscores*
Nationsparticipating
PleaserefertoAppendixAforacompletelistofcountriesparticipatingineach.
* See for example Phillips, G.W. (2007). Chance Favors the Prepared Mind: Mathematics and Science Indicators for Comparing States and Nations.
Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
34
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
of an agency or agencies responsible for collecting
classroom teachers who receive intensive training to
additional information and making recommendations
deal with diverse learning challenges through teacher
for improvement.
preparation internships, which might deal with “stu-
dents performing at different levels to the special
Addressing the Equity Imperative
needs of immigrant children to more difficult cases of
fetal alcohol syndrome or attention deficit hyperactiv-
Rather than addressing equity as an isolated action
ity disorder.”133
step, state leaders should approach it as an overarch-
ing or “interdisciplinary” imperative as they tackle
The second line of attack is made up of classroom
each of the action areas described above. Recent
teaching aides who often work with individuals or
research shows that other nations arrange their edu-
small groups of students, followed by the highly
cation systems more equitably. For example, the U.S.
trained “special education” teachers described above.
falls short across the following dimensions:
Finally, students whose lack of progress is due to fam-
ily or social difficulties outside of school can be
• An opportunity gap in access to qualified teachers
referred to “multi-disciplinary teams.”134 According to
that is among the largest in the world;129
a recent case study by the OECD, “Overall, these
• The only country where lower performing stu-
approaches to minimizing the number of students
dents and children with less-educated parents are
falling behind display two features: intensification
likely to be taught in larger classes;130 and
(providing more time by more instructors) and alter-
native approaches (rather than ‘more of the same’) ...
• Math teachers less likely than those in high-
But they do so in consistent ways, working with the
performing countries to include conceptual
classroom teacher on the specific subjects students
strategies along with basic computation for low-
are having trouble with, rather than relying on a grab
achieving students.131
bag of after-school programs and tutoring efforts
randomly distributed by grade levels and subjects.”135
In other words, education systems in the United
States tend to give disadvantaged and low-achieving
Such supports continue through lower secondary
students a watered down curriculum in larger classes
education, including a “class teacher” who follows a
taught by less qualified teachers—exactly the opposite
particular group of students for three years to moni-
of what high-performing countries do.
tor individual progress.136 Indeed, when Finland ended
early tracking of students and moved toward a more
States could greatly improve their repertoire of pol-
equitable system in the 1980s, leaders realized that
icy strategies for promoting academic equity by
lower secondary education would be a problem spot
examining specific strategies in other countries. Korea,
in the pipeline where vulnerable students might fall
for example, has two major policies for encouraging
off track, so they specifically targeted greater funding
more equal access to qualified teachers. First, teach-
toward the lower secondary grades—and continue
ers are rotated within districts on a regular basis
to do so today (Figure 6).137
every five years. Second, the government offers edu-
cators a wide range of attractive incentives to teach
Some would argue that the U.S. cannot learn from
in remote areas and regions with disadvantaged pop-
Finland because it is a more equitable country
ulations, including smaller class size, less in-class
socially and economically. However, it is telling that
teaching time, salary stipends, the chance to choose
Finland’s commitment to equity does not stop at the
the next school placement, and a competitive advan-
schoolhouse door; rather, the education system itself
tage when seeking administrative positions.132
has been carefully constructed to maximize equity
and ensure consistently high levels of performance
Many high-performing countries also provide inten-
for all students. According to an OECD report on
sive, targeted academic supports to students, such as
educational equity best practices published last year,
the Finnish and Singaporean intervention strategies
“Many countries could usefully follow the successful
described above. The Finnish example is particularly
Finnish approach to learning difficulties, offering a
interesting in that it is one of four overlapping “layers”
sequence of intensifying interventions which draw
of intensifying interventions for students who fall
back into the mainstream those who fall behind.”138
behind. The first line of attack is formed by regular
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
35
Figure 6: Finland Targets Funds Toward Lower Secondary Where
Needs Are Greatest
Primary
Lower Secondary
Upper Secondary
$12,000
$10,969
$9,899
$10,000
$9,156
$8,875
$8,000
student
per
$6,441
e
$6,000
$5,557
expenditur
ual
$4,000
Ann
$2,000
$0
Finland
United States
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Education at a Glance 2008. Paris: OECD, September
2008, p. 219,Table B1.1a. Figures represent annual expenditure on educational institutions per full-time equivalent stu-
dents for all services in 2005, in equivalent U.S. dollars converted using purchasing power parity for gross domestic product.
IV. The Federal Role
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
37
IV. The Federal Role
If benchmarking were only about measuring and
benchmarking and international best practice in
comparing outcomes, the federal government
education. For example, the U.S. Department of
might be able to play a leading role. However,
Education should:
because benchmarking is also—and most critically—
about improving policy, states must take the lead.
1) Support efforts to collect and share interna-
States have primary authority over the policy areas
tional achievement and attainment data rele-
that other nations are most eager to benchmark and
vant to states; help state leaders identify good
improve: standards, assessments, curriculum, and the
comparison nations or provinces for bench-
education workforce. States already have led in rais-
marking; and collect and disseminate informa-
ing standards, with 16 having adopted a common
tion about best practices of high-performing
core of college- and career-ready expectations in
and fast-improving nations and provinces
math and reading for high school graduation.
around the world; and
2) Convene a technical advisory committee on
The United States is not alone in this regard. Coun-
assessment to make recommendations for gen-
tries such as Canada, Australia, Germany, and Spain
erating internationally benchmarked results by
have federal-style education systems where states
state without adding significantly to costs and
retain a great deal of authority over education. And in
testing time. The committee should disseminate
many of those countries, states are taking a leading
useful technical information about existing
role in benchmarking educational performance and
assessments, share policy options for improving
policies. For example, the public outcry over mediocre
and streamlining state assessment systems, and
results on the 2000 PISA assessment led to a historic
review the feasibility of adapting NAEP to gen-
new partnership between Germany’s federal govern-
erate international comparisons as described
ment and its 16 Länder (states), with the Länder taking
above.
responsibility for the establishment of shared educa-
tion standards and assessments for schools across the
• As states reach important milestones on the way
nation while the federal government provided sup-
toward building international y competitive educa-
port for those and other state reforms.
tion systems, the federal government should offer a
range of tiered incentives to make the next stage of
America can learn from that example, too: While
the journey easier. With accountability at the core
states must take the lead, the federal government can
for greater results, such incentives could include:
help. And the federal government can do that best
1) Increased flexibility in the use of federal funds;
by playing an enabling role grounded in a new vision
for the historic state–federal partnership in educa-
2) Increased flexibility in meeting requirements of
tion—one that is less restrictive and mandate-driven
existing federal education laws so that states
and more encouraging of innovation. As states take
are not thwarted in their efforts to adapt and
on the important work of benchmarking their educa-
adopt international best practices; and
tion systems to the best in the world, the federal
3) Additional funds to help states implement
government can assist states in specific ways at each
world-class practices.
stage of the journey:
• Over the long term, the federal government should
• As soon as possible, the federal government should
change existing federal laws to align national educa-
offer new funding or allow existing funds to be
tion policies with the lessons learned from state
used to help underwrite the cost for states to take
benchmarking efforts and from federally funded
the five action steps described above related to
research.
standards and assessment, curriculum, human capi-
tal, and accountability.
Over time, the combination of better information,
additional support, and more flexibility for innovation
• At the same time, the federal government should
would greatly accelerate state progress in developing
increase its own investment or focus existing
and implementing world-class education systems. And
resources toward better research and develop-
that, in turn, wil benefit al Americans, safeguarding
ment in this area to provide state leaders with
U.S. economic security and ensuring continued pros-
more and better information about tools for
perity in the new global economy.
V. Conclusion
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
39
V. Conclusion
Other nations have benefited fromAmerica’s historic example by expanding educational opportunities for
their own citizens. Now it is time for U.S. leaders to ensure that Americans develop the skills they need
to compete—and help the U.S. remain competitive—in a rapidly changing world.
The federal government can help, but states must lead. They must look beyond their borders and America’s
shores to fully understand how to benchmark expectations for student learning. They must significantly
broaden the policy lens by drawing lessons from the highest performing, most equitable, and fastest advancing
nations and states around the globe and adapting the very best educational practices to incorporate here at
home.
If states in other countries can shape the response to the global education imperative, states in America must
do so as well. And state leaders have both the authority and an obligation to ensure that students attend
globally competitive schools and school districts. America cannot maintain its place in the world—economi-
cally, socially, or culturally—unless all of its students gain the skills that allow them to compete on a global
scale. The United States will only achieve true international competitiveness when state education policies and
institutions are restructured to meet 21st century realities.
Appendix A: Countries Participating in
International Assessments
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
1
Appendix A: Countries Participating in
International Assessments
Table reflects the most recent test year for which participation information is available.
PISA 2009
TIMSS 2007
PIRLS 2006
PISA 2009
TIMSS 2007
PIRLS 2006
4th 8th
4th 8th
Africa
Algeria
X X
Europe
Albania
X
Botswana
X
Armenia
X X
Djibouti
X
Austria
X
X
X
Egypt
X
Belgium
X
X
Ghana
X
Bosnia&Herc
X
Morocco
X X
X
Bulgaria
X
X
X
SouthAfrica
X
X
Croatia
X
Tunisia
X
X X
Cyprus
X X
Asia
CzechRepublic
X
X X
Azerbaijan
X
Denmark
X
X
X
Bahrain
X
England
X
X X
X
ChineseTaipei
X
X X
X
Estonia
X
Dubai (UAE)
X
Finland
X
Hong Kong SAR
X
X X
X
France
X
X
Indonesia
X
X
X
Georgia
X
X
Iran,IslamicRepublic
X X
X
Germany
X
X
X
Israel
X
X
X
Greece
X
Japan
X
X X
Hungary
X
X
X
Jordan
X
X
Iceland
X
X
Kazakhstan
X
Ireland
X
Korea,Republic of
X
X
Italy
X
X X
X
Kuwait
X X
X
Latvia
X
X
X
Kyrgyzstan
X
Liechtenstein
X
Lebanon
X
Lithuania
X
X X
X
Macao-China
X
Luxembourg
X
X
Malaysia
X
Macedonia,Republicof
X
Mongolia
X X
Malta
X
Oman
X
Moldova,Republicof
X
X X
X
PalestinianAuthority
X
Montenegro,Republicof
X
Qatar
X
X X
X
Netherlands,The
X
X
X
SaudiArabia
X
Norway
X
X X
X
Shanghai (China)
X
Poland
X
X
Singapore
X
X X
X
Portugal
X
Syria
X
Romania
X
X
X
Thailand
X
X
RussianFederation
X
X X
X
Turkey
X
X
Scotland
X
X X
X
Uzbekistan
X
Serbia,Republicof
X
X
Yemen
X
SlovakRepublic
X
X
X
South America
Slovenia
X
X X
X
Argentina
X
Spain
X
Brazil
X
Basque
X
Sweden
X
X X
X
Chile
X
Switzerland
X
Colombia
X
X X
Ukraine
X X
Dominican Republic
X
Panama
X
North America
Belize
Peru
X
Canada
X
X X
X
Trinidad andTobago
X
ElSalvador
X X
Uruguay
X
Honduras
X X
Oceania
Mexico
X
Australia
X
X X
TrinidadandTobago
X
New Zealand
X
X
X
UnitedStates
X
X X
X
Totals
68
40 55
40
Source: National Center for Education Statistics and Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
42
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
Endnotes
1
Webb, R. Benchmarking Definitions. APQC’s Bench-
September 2008, pp. 607–68 (p. 617).
marking Blog, February 3, 2006, http://apqcbench
14
Mortenson,T. Average Family Income by Educational
marking.blogspot.com/2006_02_01_archive.html.
Attainment of Householder 1967 to 2006. Postsec-
2
Levy, F., and R. J. Murnane. The New Division of Labor:
ondary Education OPPORTUNITY, no. 185, November
How Computers Are Creating the Next Job Market.
2007, pp. 14–16 (p. 15).
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004,
15
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
pp. 39–44.
opment. Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators 2006.
3
Ibid, p. 6. The analysis in question could not directly
Paris: OCED, 2006, p. 154.
measure task changes within jobs, only changes
16
Hanushek and Woessmann. The Role of Cognitive Skills
related to the shifting mix of jobs, so it actually under-
in Economic Development, p. 657.
estimated the extent to which skill demands are
increasing across the economy.
17
Ibid, 648–50.
4
National Center on Education and the Economy.
18
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Tough Choices for Tough Times:The Report of the New
opment. Education at a Glance 2008. Paris: OECD,
Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce.
September 2008, p. 65,Table A2.1.
Washington, DC: National Center on Education and
19
Ibid, p. 87,Table A3.2.
the Economy, 2007, p. 19.
20
Ibid, p. 98,Table A4.1.
5
Friedman,T. L. The World Is Flat. Farrar, Straus & Giroux,
21
New York, 2005.
Freeman, R. B. Does Globalization of the Scientific/Engi-
neering Workforce Threaten U.S. Economic Leadership?
6
Levy, F., and R. J. Murnane. How Computerized Work
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau for Economic
and Globalization Shape Human Skill Demands. In
Research, June 2005, p. 4.
Suarez-Orozco, M. M. (Ed.), Learning in the Global Era:
22
International Perspectives on Globalization and Educa-
Schleicher, A., and V. Stewart. Learning from World-
tion. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2007.
Class Schools. Educational Leadership 66, no. 2, Octo-
ber 2008, pp. 44–51 (p. 50, Figure 2: Graduation
7
National Governors Association. Innovation America:
Projections).
A Final Report. Washington, DC: National Governors
23
Association, 2007, p. 2.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
opment. Economic Survey of the United States 2007.
8
Wadhwa,V., B. Rissing, G. Gereffi, J. Trumpbour, and P.
Paris: OECD, May 2007, p. 100.
Engardio. The Globalization of Innovation: Pharmaceuti-
24
cals. Kansas City, MO:The Ewing Marion Kauffman
Ibid, p. 115.
Foundation, June 2008, p. 11.
25
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
9
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. “Innovation Is
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data. Paris, December
Rapidly Globalizing: India and China Are Becoming
2007 (p. 230,Table 6.2c and p. 227,Table 62a). “Best”
Centers of Pharmaceutical R&D Says Kauffman Foun-
math students are defined as those performing at the
dation Study,” news release, June 11, 2008, Kansas City,
95th percentile of the performance distribution in
MO.
each country. “Performed worse” is defined as lower
mean achievement based on statistically significant dif-
10
National Academy of Engineering Committee on the
ference at 95 percent confidence level.
Offshoring of Engineering. The Offshoring of Engineer-
26
ing: Facts, Unknowns, and Potential Implications (Free
Eighth-graders scored above average when the aver-
Executive Summary). Washington, DC: National Acad-
age is calculated as the mean score across participat-
emies Press, Washington, DC, 2008, p. 1. Available at:
ing countries. However, a reanalysis by the
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12067.html.
co-directors of the TIMSS and PIRLS International
Study Center, which oversaw the assessment, revealed
11
Wadhwa,V. Losing Our Lead in Innovative R&D.
that “using an approach dependent on participating
Business Week, June 10, 2008. Available at:
countries has caused the international average to shift
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun
with each assessment.” Based on a scale that is stable
2008/tc20080610_151383.htm.
over time, American eighth-graders performed “about
12
Levy, F., and R. J. Murnane. The New Division of Labor,
the same as the TIMSS scale average.” See Mullis, I.V.
p. 155.
S., and M. O. Martin (2007). TIMSS in Perspective:
Lessons Learned from IEA’s Four Decades of Interna-
13
In these studies, “high math performance” is defined as
tional Mathematics Assessments. In Loveless,T. (Ed.),
a one standard deviation increase in scores on stan-
Lessons Learned: What International Assessments Tell Us
dardized assessments. Hanushek, E. A., and L. Woess-
About Math Achievement. Washington, DC: Brookings
mann. The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic
Institution Press, 2007, pp. 9–36.
Development. Journal of Economic Literature 46, no. 3,
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
43
27
Ginsburg, A., G. Cooke, S. Leinwand, J. Noell, and E.
42
Schutz, G., H. W. Ursprung, and L. Woessmann.
Pollack. Reassessing U.S. International Mathematics Per-
Education Policy and Equality of Opportunity. KYKLOS
formance: New Findings from the 2003 TIMSS and PISA.
61, no. 2, pp. 279-308 (p. 292).
Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research,
43
The World Bank. Korea as a Knowledge Economy:
November 2005, pp. iv–v.
Evolutionary Process and Lessons Learned (overview of
28
Manzo, K. K. (2007, December 5). America idles on
report). Washington, DC:World Bank, 2006, p. 1.
international reading test. Education Week, 27(14),
44
Kao, J. Innovation Nation: How America Is Losing Its Inno-
p. 11.
vation Edge, Why It Matters, and What We Can Do to
29
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Get It Back. New York: Simon & Shuster, 2007, p. 53.
opment. Problem Solving for Tomorrow’s World: First
45
Friedman,T. L. The World Is Flat. New York: Farrar,
Measures of Cross-Curricular Competencies from PISA
Straus & Giroux, 2005, p. 256.
2003. Paris, OECD, 2004, p. 144,Table 2.1.
46
Viadero, D. PISA Results Scoured for Secrets to Better
30
Stewart,V. Becoming Citizens of the World. Educa-
Science Scores. Education Week 27, no. 17, Jan. 9, 2008,
tional Leadership 64, no. 7, April 2007, pp. 8–14.
p. 10.
31
Committee for Economic Development. Education for
47
Personal interview with Andreas Schleicher in Wash-
Global Leadership:The Importance of International Stud-
ington, DC, June 24, 2008.
ies and Foreign Language Education for U.S. Economic
48
and National Security. Washington, DC: Committee
Deutsche Welle. Germany Moves to All-Day Schools.
for Economic Development, 2006, pp. 1–2.
May 12, 2003. Available at: http://www.dw-world.de/
dw/article/0,2144,864144,00.html.
32
National Academy of Sciences Committee to Review
49
the Title VI and Fulbright-Hays International Education
Ertl, H. Educational Standards and the Changing
Programs. International Education and Foreign Lan-
Discourse on Education: The Reception and Conse-
guages: Keys to Securing America’s Future (Free Execu-
quences of the PISA Study in Germany. Oxford Review
tive Summary). Washington, DC: National Academies
of Education 32, no. 5, November 2006, pp. 619–634.
Press, 2007, p. 1.
50
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
33
Hanushek, E. A., D.T. Jamison, E. A. Jamison, and L.
opment. External Evaluation of the Policy Impact of
Woessmann. Education and Economic Growth.
PISA. Paris: OECD, 2008.
Education Next 8, no. 2, Spring 2008, pp. 62–70
51
Elley, W. B. How TIMSS-R Contributed to Education in
(pp. 68–69).
Eighteen Developing Countries. Prospects 35, no. 2,
34
Coulombe, S., and J. F. Tremblay. Literacy and Growth.
June 2005, pp. 199–212 (p. 203).
Topics in Macroeconomics 6, no. 2, 2006: article 4, p. 23.
52
Hegarty, S. F. Statement by Dr. Seamus F. Hegarty, Chair-
35
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
person, International Association for the Evaluation of
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD,
Educational Achievement (IEA): Why PIRLS Is Important.
TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston
December 2007, p. 58, Figure 2.11c; and p. 318, Figure
College, Nov. 28, 2007, p. 2.
6.20b.
53
36
Ginsburg, A., G. Cooke, S. Leinwand, J. Noell, and E.
Schleicher, A., and V. Stewart. Learning from World-
Pollack. Reassessing U.S. International Mathematics Per-
Class Schools, p. 47.
formance: New Findings from the 2003 TIMSS and PISA.
37
Ibid, p. 48.
Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research,
38
Roberts, S. In a Generation, Minorities May Be the U.S.
November 2005, p. 8.
Majority. New York Times, April 14, 2008.
54
Telephone interview with Vivien Stewart, June 20,
39
Baldi, S.,Y. Jin, M. Skemer, P. J. Green, and D. Herget.
2008.
Highlights from PISA 2006: Performance of U.S. 15-Year-
55
DeHann, R. L., and K. M.V. Narayan. Education for Inno-
Old Students in Science and Mathematics Literacy in an
vation: Implications for India, China, and America. Rotter-
International Context. Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-
dam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2008, p. 3.
ment of Education, National Center for Education
56
Mervis, J. Top Ph.D. Feeder Schools Are Now Chi-
Statistics, December 2007, pp. 6, 15.
nese. Science 321, no. 5886, July 2008, p. 185.
40
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
57
Commission of the European Communities. Progress
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data. Paris: OECD,
Towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training:
December 2007, p. 45,Table 2.6.
Indicators and Benchmarks 2008. Brussels, Belgium:
41
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Commission of the European Communities, 2008.
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD,
58
Telephone interview with Sir Michael Barber, June 23,
December 2007, p. 184, Figure 4.6.
2008.
44
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
59
Ibid.
71
West, M. R., and L. Woessmann. Which School Sys-
60
Torney-Purta, J., R. Lehmann, H. Oswald, and W. Schulz.
tems Sort Weaker Students into Smaller Classes?
Citizenship and Education in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic
International Evidence. European Journal of Political
Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amster-
Economy 22, no. 4, 2006, pp. 944–68.
dam, The Netherlands: International Association for
72
Akiba, M., G. K. LeTendre, and J. P. Scribner. Teacher
the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, 2001,
Quality, Opportunity Gap, and National Achievement
pp. 7, 15.
in 46 Countries. Educational Researcher 36, no. 7,
61
Zakaria, F. We All Have a Lot to Learn. Newsweek,
October 2007, pp. 369–87.
Jan. 9, 2006. Available at:
73
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
http://www.newsweek.com/id/47366.
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data. Paris: OECD,
62
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
December 2007, pp. 191–93,Table 5.17.
opment. Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators 2006.
74
Ginsburg, A., S. Leinwand,T. Anstrom, E. Pollock, and
Paris: OECD, 2008, p. 18.
E. Witt. What the United States Can Learn from Singa-
63
Hull, J. International Assessments and Student Achieve-
pore’s World-Class Mathematics System. Washington,
ment: Archived Chat. Available at: http://www.centerfor
DC: American Institutes for Research, January 2005,
publiceducation.org/site/c.kjJXJ5MPIwE/b.2481343/k.F
p. 8.
068/Archived_chat_International_assessments_and_
75
Schleicher, A. The Economics of Knowledge: Why Educa-
student_achievement.htm.
tion Is Key for Europe’s Success. Brussels, Belgium:The
64
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Lisbon Council, 2006, p. 9.
opment. Education at a Glance 2008. Paris: OECD,
76
Hegarty, S. F. Statement by Dr. Seamus F. Hegarty, p. 2.
2008, p. 343,Table C2.1 and p. 345,Table C2.3.
77
Stevenson, H., and J. Stigler. The Learning Gap. New
65
Schleicher, A. Benchmarking Internationally:The Need
York: Summit Books, 1992.
Confronts Reality. Presentation at the ECS National
78
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. The Final
Forum on Education Policy in Austin,Texas, July 2,
Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
2008 (slide 26). PowerPoint slides available at
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,
http://www.ecs.org/html/meetingsEvents/NF2008/NF
March 2008, p. 31.
2008_resources.asp.
79
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
66
National Center for Education Statistics. Variation in
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data. Paris: OECD,
the Relationship Between Nonschool Factors and Stu-
December 2007, p. 114,Table 4.2c.
dent Achievement on International Assessments. Wash-
ington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, April 2006.
80
Ginsburg, A., S. Leinwand,T. Anstrom, and E. Pollock.
The United States had a higher than average rate on
What the United States Can Learn from Singapore’s
only one characteristic studied—the proportion of
World-Class Mathematics System, p. 8.
students in single-parent families.
81
Välijärvi, J., P. Kupari, P. Linnakylä, P. Reinikainen, S.
67
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Sulkunen, J. Törnroos, and I. Arffman. The Finnish Suc-
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD,
cess in PISA – And Some Reasons Behind It 2. Fin-
December 2007, p. 184, Figure 4.6, column 4.
land: Institute for Educational Research, University of
Jyväskylä, 2007.
68
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data, Paris: OECD,
82
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
December 2007, p. 157,Table 4.11. Affluent students
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 2: Data. Paris: OECD,
are defined as those in the top quarter of their
December 2007, p. 45,Table 2.6.
respective countries on an OECD composite index of
83
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
economic, social, and cultural status.
opment. Economic Survey of the United States 2007.
69
Ibid, p. 184, Figure 4.6, column 1.
Paris: OECD, May 2007, pp. 100–101.
70
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
84
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
opment. PISA 2006 Volume 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD,
opment. Education at a Glance 2008. Paris: OECD,
December 2007, p. 184, Figure 4.6, column 3.The
2008, p. 223,Table B1.4.
impact refers to 2006 PISA science scores.
85
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Researchers have found that the United States ranks
opment. Education at a Glance 2007. Paris: OECD,
high on impact of social background on TIMSS scores
September 2007, p. 294,Table C2.4 and p. 72,Table
as well. See, for example, Schutz, G., H. W. Ursprung,
A3.6.
and L. Woessmann. Education Policy and Equality of
Opportunity, p. 292.
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
45
86
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
Knoxville,TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added
opment. Education at a Glance 2006: OECD Briefing
Research and Assessment Center, 1996, p. 9,Table 1.
Note for the United States. Paris: OECD, September
101
Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. How the World’s Best-
2006, p. 3.
Performing School Systems Come Out on Top. London:
87
For the most recent overview of such research, see
McKinsey and Company, September 2007. See also
Hanushek, E. A., and L. Woessmann. The Role of
Wang, A. H., A. B. Coleman, R. J. Coley, and R. P. Phelps.
Cognitive Skills in Economic Development.
Preparing Teachers Around the World. Educational Test-
88
ing Service, Princeton, NJ, May 2003. That earlier
Carnevale, A. P. Education and the Economy: If We’re
study also found that high-performing countries tend
So Dumb, Why Are We So Rich? Education Week 24,
to “frontload” quality control, using higher stakes filters
no. 21, February 2, 2005, pp. 40-41, 52.
at earlier points in the teacher pipeline than is typical
89
Ibid, p. 41.
in the United States. Some countries also used quality
90
Schmidt, W. Comments during panel discussion at the
control “backstops” later in the pipeline by requiring
Hunt Institute and National Governors Association
rigorous probationary induction periods during which
Governors Education Symposium. Cary, North Car-
teachers are not guaranteed permanent posts. In
olina, June 9, 2008.
contrast, the United States used a high-stakes filter at
only one of eight possible points in the teacher
91
Schmidt, W. The Role of Curriculum. American Educa-
pipeline—initial certification.
tor 23, no. 4, Fall 2005. Available at: http://www.aft.org/
102
pubsreports/american_educator/issues/fal 2005/schmidt
Kao, J. Innovation Nation, p. 85.
.htm.
103
Education Week. Quality Counts 2000: Who Should
92
Schmidt, W. Comments during panel discussion at the
Teach? Bethesda, MD, 2000. The findings are based on
Hunt Institute and National Governors Association
an Education Week analysis of data from the federal
Governors Education Symposium.
Baccalaureate and Beyond study.
104
93
Schmidt, W., and R.T. Houang. Lack of Focus in the
Corcoran, S., W. N. Evans, and R. Schwab. Women, the
Mathematics Curriculum: Symptom or Cause? In Les-
Labor Market, and the Declining Relative Quality of
sons Learned: What International Tests Tell Us about Math
Teachers. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 23,
Achievement (T. Loveless, ed.), Washington, DC: Brook-
no. 3, 2004, pp. 449–70.
ings Institution Press, 2007, pp. 65–84 (pp. 77–78).
105
Michigan State University. “MSU Study Finds that U.S.
94
Ginsburg, A., S. Leinwand,T. Anstrom, and E. Pollock.
Middle School Teachers Are Ill-Prepared,” news
What the United States Can Learn from Singapore’s
release, Dec. 11, 2008, Lansing, MI.
World-Class Mathematics System.
106
Schleicher, A., and V. Stewart. Learning from World-
95
Schmidt, W., R. Houang, and L. Cogan. A Coherent
Class Schools, p. 49.
Curriculum:The Case of Mathematics. American Edu-
107
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
cator 26, no. 2, Summer 2002, pp. 10–26, 47 (p. 19).
opment. Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and
96
Ibid, p. 12. The finding is based on an examination of
Retaining Effective Teachers. Paris: OECD, 2005, p. 202.
textbooks in 37 countries.
108
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
97
Ginsburg, A., S. Leinwand,T. Anstrom, and E. Pollock.
opment. Formative Assessment: Improving Learning In
What the United States Can Learn from Singapore’s
Secondary Classrooms. Paris: OECD, 2005, pp. 38-39.
World-Class Mathematics System, pp. 41–42.
109
E-mail communication from Kati Haycock, November
98
Christensen, C. M., and M. B. Horn. How Do We
12, 2008.
Transform Our Schools? Education Next 8, no. 3, Sum-
110
Matthews, P., H. Moorman, and D. Nusche. Building a
mer 2008, pp. 13–19.
Leadership Capacity for System Improvement in Vic-
99
Wagemaker, H. Highlights of Findings from Major Inter-
toria, Australia. In Pont, B., D. Nusche, and D. Hopkins
national Study on Pedagogy and ICT Use in Schools.
(Eds.), Improving School Leadership, Volume 2: Case Stud-
2006. Available at: http://www.utdanningsdirektoratet.
ies on System Leadership. Paris: Organisation for Eco-
no/upload/Forskning/Internasjonale_undersokelser/
nomic Co-Operation and Development, 2008, pp.
sites2006_presentasjon.pdf.
179–213.
111
100
Haycock, K. Good Teaching Matters: How Well-Quali-
Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. How the World’s Best-
fied Teachers Can Close the Gap. Thinking K-16 3, no.
Performing School Systems Come Out on Top.
2, 1–14, Summer 1998, p. 3. Based on Sanders, W. L.,
and J. C. Rivers. Cumulative and Residual Effects of
Teachers on Future Student Academic Achievement.
46
Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education
112
Barber, M. Comments during presentation at the Hunt
126
Hutchison, D., and I. Schagen. Comparisons between
Institute National Governors Association Governors Edu-
PISA and TIMSS: Are We the Man with Two Watches?
cation Symposium, Cary, North Carolina, June 8, 2008.
In Loveless,T. (Ed.), Lessons Learned: What International
113
Barber, M. Comments during presentation at the Hunt
Assessments Tell Us about Math Achievement. Washing-
Institute National Governors Association Governors
ton, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2007, pp. 227–61
Education Symposium.
(p. 238).
127
114
Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. How the World’s Best-
For more information, visit the Early Assessment Pro-
Performing School Systems Come Out on Top, p. 16.
gram (EAP) Web site at http://www.calstate.edu/EAP.
128
115
Ibid, pp. 36–37.
Gonzales, P., J. C. Guzmán, L. Partelow, E. Pahlke, L.
Jocelyn, D. Kastberg, and T. Williams. Highlights from
116
Archer, J. British Inspectors Bring Instructional Focus
the Trends in International Mathematics and Science
to N.Y.C. Education Week. May 16, 2006, Available at:
Study (TIMSS) 2003 (NCES 2005–005). Washington,
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/05/17/37
DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center
inspect.h25.html.
for Education Statistics, 2004, pp. 101–3.
117
Achieve, Inc. Creating a World-Class Education System
129
Akiba, M., G. K. LeTendre, and J. P. Scribner. Teacher
in Ohio. Washington, DC: Achieve, Inc., 2007, p. 64.
Quality, Opportunity Gap, and National Achievement
118
Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. How the World’s Best-
in 46 countries. Educational Researcher 36, no. 7,
Performing School Systems Come Out on Top, p. 38.
October 2007, pp. 369–87.
119
Ginsburg, A., S. Leinwand,T. Anstrom, and E. Pollock.
130
West, M. R., and L. Woessmann.Which School Sys-
What the United States Can Learn from Singapore’s
tems Sort Weaker Students into Smaller Classes?
World-Class Mathematics System, pp. 34-35.
International Evidence. European Journal of Political
Economy 22, no. 4, 2006, pp. 944–68.
120
Schleicher, A., and V. Stewart. Learning from World-
Class Schools, p. 49.
131
Desimone, L. M.,T. Smith, D. Baker, and K. Ueno.
Assessing Barriers to the Reform of U.S. Mathematics
121
Laukkanen, R. Finnish Strategy for High-Level Educa-
Instruction from an International Perspective. Ameri-
tion for All. In Soguel, N. C., and P. Jaccard (Eds.), Gov-
can Educational Research Journal 42, no. 3, Fall 2005,
ernance and Performance of Education Systems, 2008,
pp. 501–35 (p. 524).
pp. 305–24 (p. 318).
132
Kang, N. H., and M. Hong. Achieving Excellence in
122
See, for example, Woessmann, L. International Evi-
Teacher Workforce and Equity in Learning Opportu-
dence on School Competition, Autonomy, and
nities in South Korea. Educational Researcher 37, no. 4,
Accountability: A Review. Peabody Journal of Education
May 2008, pp. 200–207.
82, no. 2–3, June 2007, pp. 473–97; and Fuchs,T., and L.
Woessmann. What Accounts for International Differ-
133
Grubb, N., H. M. Jahr, J. Neumüller, and S. Field. Equity in
ences in Student Performance? A Re-examination
Education Thematic Review: Finland Country Note. Paris:
using the PISA Data. Empirical Economics 32, no. 2–3,
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Devel-
2007, pp. 433–64.
opment, 2005, p. 20.
123
Woessmann, L., E. Ludemann, G. Schutz, and M. R.
134
Ibid, pp. 19–20.
West. School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the
135
Ibid, p. 20.
Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence
136
from PISA 2003. OECD Education Working Paper No.
Ibid, p. 20.
13. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation
137
Laukkanen, R. Finnish Strategy for High-Level Educa-
and Development, Dec. 21, 2007, p. 1.
tion for All. In Soguel, N. C., and P. Jaccard (Eds.), Gov-
124
Telephone interview with Vivien Stewart, June 20,
ernance and Performance of Education Systems. The
2008.
Netherlands: Springer Publishing, 2008, pp. 305–24
(p. 312).
125
Stephens, M., and M. Coleman. Comparing PIRLS and
138
PISA with NAEP in Reading, Mathematics, and Science
Field, S., M. Kuczera, and B. Pont. No More Failures:Ten
(Working Paper). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Steps to Equity in Education. Paris: Organisation for
Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2007,
2007.
p. 109.
